public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
@ 2003-07-16  8:25 Kumba
  2003-07-16 10:00 ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Kumba @ 2003-07-16  8:25 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

Lately, I've been running into an awful lot of manifest issues in the 
portage tree.  Not just on x86, but sparc and mips too.  For those that 
may doubt me, add "manifest strict" to FEATURES and see for yourself.

Where these issues are coming from is anyone's guess.  Probable suspects 
are those devs not using repoman to check ebuilds into the tree, or we 
might have some kind of corruption running around on the rsync servers, 
or there's some odd bug in portage.

To quote actual evidence, sys-devel/gettext, app-arch/zip, 
app-admin/mirrorselect, and app-admin/gentoolkit gave manifest errors.

on x86, gettext-0.12.1 gives this:
Calculating dependencies ...done!
 >>> emerge (1 of 1) sys-devel/gettext-0.12.1 to /
 >>> md5 files   ;-) gettext-0.12.ebuild
 >>> md5 files   ;-) gettext-0.11.3-r1.ebuild
 >>> md5 files   ;-) gettext-0.11.1.ebuild

!!! File is corrupt or incomplete. (Digests do not match)
 >>> our recorded digest: 3ae8937c9dd834eff566b1291cd0438a
 >>>  your file's digest: 172a26a4a6ab693018ad4b352c7daf36
!!! File does not exist: 
/usr/portage/sys-devel/gettext//gettext-0.12.1.ebuild

on sparc:
 >>> emerge (1 of 1) sys-devel/gettext-0.12.1 to /
 >>> md5 files   ;-) gettext-0.12.ebuild

!!! File is corrupt or incomplete. (Digests do not match)
 >>> our recorded digest: f1002900097f883163423147dce6d9d9
 >>>  your file's digest: b696d10b2ea72a2dc08b55020f8f79d7
!!! File does not exist: /usr/portage/sys-devel/gettext//ChangeLog

(mips gettext is not included as I already re-digested on that machine, 
and an rsync takes ~20mins)

Why these two differ on different machines, I'm not exactly sure on. 
Below are some other snippets between sparc, x86, and mips.



x86/sparc/mips app-admin/mirrorselect:
Calculating dependencies ...done!
 >>> emerge (1 of 1) app-admin/mirrorselect-0.6 to /
 >>> md5 files   ;-) mirrorselect-0.6.ebuild
 >>> md5 files   ;-) mirrorselect-0.3.ebuild

!!! File is corrupt or incomplete. (Digests do not match)
 >>> our recorded digest: 6d748dbe957886a5ca691637d94ec1b3
 >>>  your file's digest: 100d61a5fe0f28e65afbcad758984d6a
!!! File does not exist: /usr/portage/app-admin/mirrorselect//ChangeLog

In this case, the error is the exact same on all three machines.


x86 app-arch/zip:
 >>> emerge (1 of 1) app-arch/zip-2.3-r2 to /
 >>> md5 files   ;-) zip-2.3-r1.ebuild

!!! File is corrupt or incomplete. (Digests do not match)
 >>> our recorded digest: 3276fb2669785d06bfb6c2cec123521d
 >>>  your file's digest: f56548176b22628e4a08abadbcbad329
!!! File does not exist: /usr/portage/app-arch/zip//zip-2.3-r2.ebuild


on sparc:
Calculating dependencies ...done!
 >>> emerge (1 of 1) app-arch/zip-2.3-r2 to /
 >>> md5 files   ;-) zip-2.3-r1.ebuild

!!! File is corrupt or incomplete. (Digests do not match)
 >>> our recorded digest: 97e7d71520a7e2309f49e5d7f4951a9b
 >>>  your file's digest: 9d33eb6208ea6babfe81ca1113d7258a
!!! File does not exist: /usr/portage/app-arch/zip//ChangeLog

(masked on mips)

In these cases, two different machines report different md5sums and 
apparent errors in the manifest.


I suspect something similar will happen if one tried the same on 
gentoolkit, but this mail is long enough already, so I'll exclude it.

I've been running into these issues quite often, and I suspect several 
reasons.  In some cases, it seems like some people aren't using repoman, 
as I'll redigest and commit via repoman, and half an hour later, the 
manifest errors are gone after an rsync.  In other cases, like where two 
different machines report different errors in the manifests, I'm 
thinking either corruption on the rsync servers, or a bug in portage 
somewheres.

If someone wants to give this a shot, again, add "manifest strict" to 
FEATURES, and start emerging updates over the next few days.  You're 
bound to run into the same issues I'm seeing on multiple machines.

Ideas, thoughts?  Or am I just going insane?

--Kumba


-- 
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: 
small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are 
elsewhere."  --Elrond


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-16  8:25 [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree Kumba
@ 2003-07-16 10:00 ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  2003-07-16 11:50   ` Tavis Ormandy
  2003-07-16 15:50   ` Kumba
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Dhruba Bandopadhyay @ 2003-07-16 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

Kumba wrote:
> Lately, I've been running into an awful lot of manifest issues in the 
> portage tree.  Not just on x86, but sparc and mips too.  For those that 
> may doubt me, add "manifest strict" to FEATURES and see for yourself.

Is there really a keyword in FEATURES called 'manifest'?  It is 
certainly not documented in make.conf.  Where is this declared?


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-16 10:00 ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
@ 2003-07-16 11:50   ` Tavis Ormandy
  2003-07-17  9:40     ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  2003-07-16 15:50   ` Kumba
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Tavis Ormandy @ 2003-07-16 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 11:00:48AM +0100, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:
> 
> Is there really a keyword in FEATURES called 'manifest'?  It is 
> certainly not documented in make.conf.  Where is this declared?

#  'strict'	causes portage to react strongly to conditions that
#		have the potential to be dangerous -- like missing
#  		or incorrect Manifest files.

-- 
-------------------------------------
taviso@sdf.lonestar.org | finger me for my gpg key.
-------------------------------------------------------

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-16 10:00 ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  2003-07-16 11:50   ` Tavis Ormandy
@ 2003-07-16 15:50   ` Kumba
  2003-07-17  0:25     ` Mike Frysinger
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Kumba @ 2003-07-16 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:

> Is there really a keyword in FEATURES called 'manifest'?  It is 
> certainly not documented in make.conf.  Where is this declared?

It was in portage for a time, during the 2.0.48_preX series of portage. 
  It basically cross-checks every file related to that package against 
the manifest.  Coupled with the "strict" keyword, it makes portage 
extremely stingy on md5summing files.  A single mismatch like I'm 
getting and it will refuse to go any further.

This is why I am wondering if 'manifest' may be buggy, or we have some 
kind of minor corruption plaguing rsync somehow.

--Kumba


-- 
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: 
small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are 
elsewhere."  --Elrond


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-16 15:50   ` Kumba
@ 2003-07-17  0:25     ` Mike Frysinger
  2003-07-17  2:05       ` Brad Cowan
  2003-07-17  6:06       ` Kumba
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2003-07-17  0:25 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

no corruption, people just dont update their Manifest files ...
i run scripts on the tree every few days that updates them all :p
- -mike

On Wednesday 16 July 2003 11:50, Kumba wrote:
> Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:
> > Is there really a keyword in FEATURES called 'manifest'?  It is
> > certainly not documented in make.conf.  Where is this declared?
>
> It was in portage for a time, during the 2.0.48_preX series of portage.
>   It basically cross-checks every file related to that package against
> the manifest.  Coupled with the "strict" keyword, it makes portage
> extremely stingy on md5summing files.  A single mismatch like I'm
> getting and it will refuse to go any further.
>
> This is why I am wondering if 'manifest' may be buggy, or we have some
> kind of minor corruption plaguing rsync somehow.
>
> --Kumba
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
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=DF84
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-17  0:25     ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2003-07-17  2:05       ` Brad Cowan
  2003-07-17  6:06       ` Kumba
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Brad Cowan @ 2003-07-17  2:05 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: vapier; +Cc: gentoo-dev

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 20:25:43 -0400
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> no corruption, people just dont update their Manifest files ...
> i run scripts on the tree every few days that updates them all :p
> - -mike
> 

I think allot of them are coming from people not using repoman like they
should ;)

-- 
Brad Cowan <bcowan@gentoo.org>
Developer,
Gentoo Linux	http://www.gentoo.org/~bcowan

Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB1F16A56
Key fingerprint = C408 75B9 E68D 26E2 EAAE  20CF 4D5E 293D B1F1 6A56

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-17  0:25     ` Mike Frysinger
  2003-07-17  2:05       ` Brad Cowan
@ 2003-07-17  6:06       ` Kumba
  2003-07-17 21:58         ` Mike Frysinger
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Kumba @ 2003-07-17  6:06 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

Mike Frysinger wrote:

> no corruption, people just dont update their Manifest files ...
> i run scripts on the tree every few days that updates them all :p
> - -mike

I think you need to run it again...zip, reiserfsprogs, gettext, and many 
more recent security packages lack updated manifests.  I run into them 
way too often these days.

Perhaps it should be made mandatory devs run "manifest strict" (similar 
to how we are supposed to use "cvs" when commiting) so that these 
manifest errors start disappearing.

--Kumba


-- 
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: 
small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are 
elsewhere."  --Elrond


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-17  9:40     ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
@ 2003-07-17  8:58       ` Kumba
  2003-07-17  9:55         ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  2003-07-17 22:59       ` Mike Frysinger
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Kumba @ 2003-07-17  8:58 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:
> That is 'strict'.  I was asking about 'manifest'.

Turn it on and find out :)

--Kumba

-- 
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: 
small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are 
elsewhere."  --Elrond


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-16 11:50   ` Tavis Ormandy
@ 2003-07-17  9:40     ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  2003-07-17  8:58       ` Kumba
  2003-07-17 22:59       ` Mike Frysinger
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Dhruba Bandopadhyay @ 2003-07-17  9:40 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

Tavis Ormandy wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 11:00:48AM +0100, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:
> 
>>Is there really a keyword in FEATURES called 'manifest'?  It is 
>>certainly not documented in make.conf.  Where is this declared?
> 
> 
> #  'strict'	causes portage to react strongly to conditions that
> #		have the potential to be dangerous -- like missing
> #  		or incorrect Manifest files.
> 

That is 'strict'.  I was asking about 'manifest'.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-17  8:58       ` Kumba
@ 2003-07-17  9:55         ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Dhruba Bandopadhyay @ 2003-07-17  9:55 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

Kumba wrote:
> Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:
> 
>> That is 'strict'.  I was asking about 'manifest'.
> 
> 
> Turn it on and find out :)
> 
> --Kumba
> 

I turned it on as soon as I saw the thread.  However, I strongly suggest 
that if it is a valid feature then it should be added to the list in 
make.conf.  By the way, I can verify that I also got manifest errors on 
packages you mentioned.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-17  6:06       ` Kumba
@ 2003-07-17 21:58         ` Mike Frysinger
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2003-07-17 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 17 July 2003 02:06, Kumba wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > no corruption, people just dont update their Manifest files ...
> > i run scripts on the tree every few days that updates them all :p
> > - -mike
>
> I think you need to run it again...

actually i added it to gentoo-src/portage-scripts about 3/4 weeks ago ;)
'manifest_check'
- -mike
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
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=ADyf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree
  2003-07-17  9:40     ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
  2003-07-17  8:58       ` Kumba
@ 2003-07-17 22:59       ` Mike Frysinger
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2003-07-17 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 17 July 2003 05:40, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:
> Tavis Ormandy wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 11:00:48AM +0100, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote:
> >>Is there really a keyword in FEATURES called 'manifest'?  It is
> >>certainly not documented in make.conf.  Where is this declared?
> >
> > #  'strict'	causes portage to react strongly to conditions that
> > #		have the potential to be dangerous -- like missing
> > #  		or incorrect Manifest files.
>
> That is 'strict'.  I was asking about 'manifest'.

the manifest FEATURE is a fleeting one ...
that is to say it isnt documented because it isnt going to exist for long ...
forget about it, go home, kiss your loved ones, and get a good nites sleep.
- -mike
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
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=Htqh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-07-17 22:59 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-07-16  8:25 [gentoo-dev] Manifest issues in the tree Kumba
2003-07-16 10:00 ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
2003-07-16 11:50   ` Tavis Ormandy
2003-07-17  9:40     ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
2003-07-17  8:58       ` Kumba
2003-07-17  9:55         ` Dhruba Bandopadhyay
2003-07-17 22:59       ` Mike Frysinger
2003-07-16 15:50   ` Kumba
2003-07-17  0:25     ` Mike Frysinger
2003-07-17  2:05       ` Brad Cowan
2003-07-17  6:06       ` Kumba
2003-07-17 21:58         ` Mike Frysinger

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox