* [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match @ 2007-09-08 8:14 Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:09 ` Peter Humphrey ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Herbert Laubner @ 2007-09-08 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Hi, I am installing xorg-x11 on an amd64 machine. On xextproto-7.0.2 the digest verification failed. Is there a change giong on or is there a bugy file on the server? Regards, herb -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match 2007-09-08 8:14 [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match Herbert Laubner @ 2007-09-08 9:09 ` Peter Humphrey 2007-09-08 9:23 ` Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:24 ` Bernhard Auzinger 2007-09-08 11:28 ` Duncan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Peter Humphrey @ 2007-09-08 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 On Saturday 08 Sep 2007, Herbert Laubner wrote: > Hi, > > I am installing xorg-x11 on an amd64 machine. > > On xextproto-7.0.2 the digest verification failed. Is there a change > giong on or is there a bugy file on the server? It installed ok here. -- Rgds Peter. Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93 -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match 2007-09-08 9:09 ` Peter Humphrey @ 2007-09-08 9:23 ` Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:29 ` Peter Humphrey 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Herbert Laubner @ 2007-09-08 9:23 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Well, I found more in the x11-proto section. Since I want to proceed, I used ebuild xxx.ebuild digest. I hope the files on the server are not corrupt :-) Rgds Herb Am 08.09.2007 um 11:09 schrieb Peter Humphrey: > On Saturday 08 Sep 2007, Herbert Laubner wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am installing xorg-x11 on an amd64 machine. >> >> On xextproto-7.0.2 the digest verification failed. Is there a change >> giong on or is there a bugy file on the server? > > It installed ok here. > > -- > Rgds > Peter. > Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93 > -- > gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match 2007-09-08 9:23 ` Herbert Laubner @ 2007-09-08 9:29 ` Peter Humphrey 2007-09-08 9:50 ` Herbert Laubner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Peter Humphrey @ 2007-09-08 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 On Saturday 08 Sep 2007, Herbert Laubner wrote: > Well, I found more in the x11-proto section. > > Since I want to proceed, I used ebuild xxx.ebuild digest. Very dangerous! How do you know it's the digest that was faulty? -- Rgds Peter. Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93 -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match 2007-09-08 9:29 ` Peter Humphrey @ 2007-09-08 9:50 ` Herbert Laubner 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Herbert Laubner @ 2007-09-08 9:50 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Eliminated source line in make.conf, running actually emerge -e world, stuff gets downloaded from distfile.gentoo.org, hope to find all data ok on that server. Rgds Herbert Am 08.09.2007 um 11:29 schrieb Peter Humphrey: > On Saturday 08 Sep 2007, Herbert Laubner wrote: >> Well, I found more in the x11-proto section. >> >> Since I want to proceed, I used ebuild xxx.ebuild digest. > > Very dangerous! How do you know it's the digest that was faulty? > > -- > Rgds > Peter. > Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93 > -- > gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match 2007-09-08 8:14 [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:09 ` Peter Humphrey @ 2007-09-08 9:24 ` Bernhard Auzinger 2007-09-08 11:39 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Duncan 2007-09-08 11:28 ` Duncan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Bernhard Auzinger @ 2007-09-08 9:24 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Am Samstag 08 September 2007 schrieb Herbert Laubner: > Hi, > > I am installing xorg-x11 on an amd64 machine. > > On xextproto-7.0.2 the digest verification failed. Is there a change > giong on or is there a bugy file on the server? > > Regards, > herb Hi, change the GENTOO_MIRROR and the digest verification will be ok. With gd.tuwien.ac.at I experienced the same. Change the mirror in your make.conf temporarily to the another gentoo-mirror and all will be fine. Rgds Bernhard -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-amd64] Re: xextproto - filesize does not match 2007-09-08 9:24 ` Bernhard Auzinger @ 2007-09-08 11:39 ` Duncan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Duncan @ 2007-09-08 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Bernhard Auzinger <e0026053@student.tuwien.ac.at> posted 200709081124.50230.e0026053@student.tuwien.ac.at, excerpted below, on Sat, 08 Sep 2007 11:24:50 +0200: > Am Samstag 08 September 2007 schrieb Herbert Laubner: >> On xextproto-7.0.2 the digest verification failed. Is there a change >> giong on or is there a bugy file on the server? > change the GENTOO_MIRROR and the digest verification will be ok. With > gd.tuwien.ac.at I experienced the same. Change the mirror in your > make.conf temporarily to the another gentoo-mirror and all will be fine. It's not just the mirror, as 64.127.121.98 (owl.gentoo.org), which I synced with, has the same issue. See my just previous post for more, but briefly, it seems the upgrade to the just released xorg-7.3 caused an update and Manifest regeneration on some not updated xorg packages as well. This one, and apparently some others, are incorrect. (Either that or xorg upstream stealth updated some files without changing versions, as they've a history of doing, but at least with this one, they are still shipping the old version direct off xorg.freedesktop.org. Again, see my previous post, complete with bug number to follow if interested.) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-amd64] Re: xextproto - filesize does not match 2007-09-08 8:14 [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:09 ` Peter Humphrey 2007-09-08 9:24 ` Bernhard Auzinger @ 2007-09-08 11:28 ` Duncan 2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Duncan @ 2007-09-08 11:28 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-amd64 Herbert Laubner <laubner@gmx.net> posted 44213F29-50C9-4EFF-8914-8444389095DA@gmx.net, excerpted below, on Sat, 08 Sep 2007 10:14:01 +0200: > I am installing xorg-x11 on an amd64 machine. > > On xextproto-7.0.2 the digest verification failed. Is there a change > giong on or is there a bugy file on the server? The digest on the ebuild itself or a different file? If it's the ebuild or something in the synced tree, try resyncing, and if that doesn't work, you can wait a day and try again, or verify against the file at http://viewcvs.gentoo.org and redigest if you trust the results. (Note that the viewcvs version won't exactly match either, or didn't last I had to use it, as its source tracking lines are slightly different. You can verify the actual code, however, line by line or by downloading and with a diff.) If the viewcvs version is the same but for the source tracking lines, check for a bug and file one if there's none filed. There's a known issue in instances when an ebuild was in the tree (likely never unmasked), removed, and then later added again at the same version, where the system gets mixed up and the digest doesn't match. The size is off by a specific small amount, 4 or 6 bytes, IIRC. That's the most common reason for a no-match not attributable to a bad sync, and one the Gentoo maintainer is often not aware of until he gets a bug about it. If it's something in distfiles (basically, if it's one of the tarballs), delete it from your distfiles cache and try again. It may have been a problem in the download. If that doesn't fix it, check bugs and file one if necessary. FWIW, my last sync was a couple days ago (well, three, Sept. 5, early morning US), but updated as of then, xextproto-7.0.2.ebuild has a ctime of Feb 6, an mtime of Feb 4, so it has been around for awhile. The Manifest file likewise, so no distfile changes since then, either. I did a total rebuild (emerge -e world) back in May (wow, has it been /that/ long since gcc 4.2? seems so!), so that's when I last emerged it. The tar.bz2 distfile should be 68323 bytes, the ebuild 444. Hmmm! "Houston. We have a problem!" I just synced to double-check, and while the version remained the same and neither the ebuild nor the changelog changed, the Manifest did. When I looked at it above, it wasn't yet signed. It looks like they gpg- signed it (a part of the security they are gradually implementing in the tree), but when they did, something happened to the distfile/tarball size. Above, it was 68323, now it says 68342, yet the version number is the same! That should NOT happen! The previous one should I believe be the correct one. If you get 68323 bytes and an md5sum of 242388ab65dde3a3dd313eeee265e429, it /should/ be reasonably safe (but still it's your decision whether the risk is worth it) to go ahead and redigest and merge it, as that's probably the real one -- it agrees with what I have here. Looks like there's already a bug on it (from last year): http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=150225 Seems upstream (xorg) silently changed the tarball without changing the version number... back in 2006. Maybe they pulled the same trick once again (I see a passel of X updates waiting... on ~amd64, probably not so many for stable... just checked, xorg 7.3 released on the sixth, must be that). If so, it may be a bit before all sources locations have the correct file, since the version didn't change, so even deleting the tarball and redownloading might not get you the new one for a few days. FWIW, deleting and redownloading, I get the 68323 byte version, same as before. Maybe it's time for a new bug? Double-checking, yes, it's time for a new bug, as downloading manually directly from (as gotten from the ebuild, followed to the eclass): http://xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/individual/proto/ results in a file exactly 68323 bytes long, the old size. Thus, the Manifest file seems to be wrong. OK, bug filed (with you credited as bringing it to my attention): http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=191676 -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-09-08 11:48 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2007-09-08 8:14 [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:09 ` Peter Humphrey 2007-09-08 9:23 ` Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:29 ` Peter Humphrey 2007-09-08 9:50 ` Herbert Laubner 2007-09-08 9:24 ` Bernhard Auzinger 2007-09-08 11:39 ` [gentoo-amd64] " Duncan 2007-09-08 11:28 ` Duncan
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox