From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Marusich Subject: Re: Fixed output derivation hash mismatch - why? Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 21:52:53 -0700 Message-ID: <87muy71zdm.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87tvsgev2z.fsf@gmail.com> <87po344yi5.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36574) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f6qhs-0006ej-BP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:53:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f6qhp-0001n0-BN for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:53:04 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]:38006) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f6qhp-0001lj-3z for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:53:01 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id y69so5512128pfb.5 for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2018 21:53:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87po344yi5.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Thu, 12 Apr 2018 04:31:14 -0400") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mark H Weaver writes: > I think the problem is here: > > (define hash (sha256 > (base32 > "1r3v22qkypccqifzbww5lrn6hf1chi23m6zzkyvb8bvg457nxslq"))) > > Remove the 'sha256'. It should just be this: > > (define hash (base32 > "1r3v22qkypccqifzbww5lrn6hf1chi23m6zzkyvb8bvg457nxslq")) > > Within 'origin' records, the 'sha256' is the field name, part of the > constructor syntax. Here, you are not within an 'origin' constructor, > and the 'sha256' is instead a procedure which computes the sha256 hash > of its argument. This was the problem! I misunderstood what the daemon was telling me, and I didn't realize that "sha256" was the field name. I knew a second pair of eyes would help! Thank you for helping me to see more clearly, Mark. :-) =2D-=20 Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEy/WXVcvn5+/vGD+x3UCaFdgiRp0FAlrQN6UACgkQ3UCaFdgi Rp2C/hAAqiLjc6dV5zXfW7Cs6IFe4IG1NWIaqHxSGZ8xwt7w9Fr4oKEMMWkn5+f/ Mcfo1ZY/OFP1Vob8l5hNmDHmmbqceZ2BxlfKAo0IiP13zaEIQK66zrQYaSY+1kpX 0hySkzCRsCALfZgsmIamuGesB3B/a3jn5zufWMv0VqKV2QoF+/GlWGR42z3No3Eo g2aje2dQ32eecTDrG67ka1BkvwcLeFQoEqPbExGgbfNIeQmon7SbDKo8y8qffpTm /FFYB7oGXoHF8g7LnIXJ/y0i9OQWZpI/S8GTgpQBMde9O7l23esKiTnIth0Y5R7H 62lFZZwDwzvvKcK/KXegjhEo78XsIWWxbDWgEXZVFK9TqHWIBKBv0ULkmDbdUXnR /rWBp4y+hEKc2iE7Hwdtm+AZjfvlXPTrnR6I/g4cAOldGA6Yd5wlF28XuKQcid3v vpT13GFooSLThj3WDsEuEAyFqsfG3cLBx3zwogIMuUn9831Mxltw+mhuf27L3VOn WX6lKFJMqtQeMQt7x4mI97DP+1mjAiLDkglyGWOfhIbFz8v6Ed+yQWfAgIkNaByc x1q5hyu2EW+lGS346qwtLDcKk7J/99gR4/n+0Dtcjeyzio/bTd1J+le/QwnCT2jS 1AkORZ4Bvyy/10RLvsSicmfvAL6r0RknIK1Qu0gnJuTSQXwZh0M= =awca -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--