From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Subject: bug#28659: v0.13: guix pull fails; libgit2-0.26.0 and 0.25.1 content hashes fail Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 19:05:00 +0200 Message-ID: <87infx8oqr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877ewf18d4.fsf@gnu.org> <87o9ppoabw.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53167) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dz4AS-0002nU-CX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:06:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dz4AO-00069i-9V for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:06:08 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:35778) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dz4AO-00069d-5Y for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:06:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dz4AM-0006e6-7M for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:06:03 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87o9ppoabw.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Mon, 02 Oct 2017 17:09:39 +0200") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 28659@debbugs.gnu.org Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > What=E2=80=99s sad here is that we do have the right tarball at: > > https://mirror.hydra.gnu.org/file/libgit2-0.25.1.tar.gz/sha256/1cdwcw38= frc1wf28x5ppddazv9hywc718j92f3xa3ybzzycyds3s Sad indeed! > The problem is that the hash check is performed by guix-daemon itself, > not by =E2=80=9Cguix perform-download=E2=80=9D. So when guix-daemon diag= noses a hash > mismatch, it=E2=80=99s too late and we cannot try again and use the > content-addressed mirror. Why don't we try our content-addressed mirror first? > A crude but helpful fix would be to have perform-download compute the > hash by itself and act accordingly. It=E2=80=99s crude because that mean= s that > we=E2=80=99d be computing the hash twice: once in =E2=80=98guix perform-d= ownload=E2=80=99 and a > second time in guix-daemon. For archives below ~20=C2=A0MiB it=E2=80=99s= probably OK > though. > > Thoughts? We may want more guix hackers' viewpoints here, I don't feel very qualified...As this would be a temporary workaround only until we have > In the future, with the daemon written in Guile, it=E2=80=99s one area wh= ere we > could achieve better integration and coordination among the various > pieces. ...it might be fine? Do we want/need to bring out a new release for this, e.g. 0.13.1, or even 0.14? I'm not sure how bad it is that --no-substitutes does not work. I think working on guix pull to not compile everything locally may have priority? janneke --=20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE http://AvatarAcademy.com