X-Authentication-Warning: kendall.sfbr.org: jeffw set sender to jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org using -f
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:50:04 -0500
From: JT Williams <jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Running dsmcheck on packages, before upload to Simtel.NET?
Message-ID: <20010803205004.A7790@kendall.sfbr.org>
Mail-Followup-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
References: <3B6B2541 DOT BC41EDA9 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <200108032230 DOT SAA31124 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <200108032230.SAA31124@envy.delorie.com>; from dj@delorie.com on Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 06:30:42PM -0400
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

-: Here is my current checkzip script.  If you would send me a patch and
-: point me at the sources for dsmcheck, I would run it on all zips going
-: to simtel.

I have a shell script that I use to check the zips I d/l for internal
consistency.  One of the more revealing tests is to compare the output of
`unzip -l foo.zip' with the output of `unzip -p foo.zip manifest/foo.mft'
(both suitably processed with sed, then sdiff'ed).  Many archives do not
pass this test, i.e., show some discrepancy between the two lists.
I don't know perl, though, so I can't offer a patch.