[gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match

[gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match

[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
-- 
gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match

[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

Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match

[Herbert Laubner]

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

Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match

[Bernhard Auzinger]

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

Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match

[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

Re: [gentoo-amd64] xextproto - filesize does not match

[Herbert Laubner]

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

[gentoo-amd64] Re: xextproto - filesize does not match

[Duncan]

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

[gentoo-amd64] Re: xextproto - filesize does not match

[Duncan]

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