From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: use of git-fetch
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 16:32:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKrPhPNhHPbiStd5mu4HAZTus2b3D0==R1dBZ1qmMVFkCxWHkg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKrPhPMa1h48zwpa7XBJuve3ZHPeb+fjQRdXh=H97RadcDa5Aw@mail.gmail.com>
	<87h9ov6gqe.fsf@gnu.org>
	<CAKrPhPOqWddXZzFO9=5uvYKiu_2jCrAt5Jyo-qLjZD_4ZNoFbw@mail.gmail.com>
	<87zj2mo5dy.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56145)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <federico.beffa@gmail.com>) id 1ZIe19-0001Hc-Iq
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:32:08 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <federico.beffa@gmail.com>) id 1ZIe15-0000Gm-Gy
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:32:07 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87zj2mo5dy.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> wrote=
:
> Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org> skribis:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> wr=
ote:
>>> Federico Beffa <beffa@ieee.org> skribis:
>>>
>>>>               (sha256
>>>>                (base32
>>>>                 "06mc7kh3fzdh2mqkyynjnp0xpv30yfaiik8bqv8z5b6hldji3cky"=
))))
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>               (sha256
>>>>                (base32
>>>>                 "06mc7kh3fzdh2mqkyynjnp0xpv30yfaiik8bqv8z5b6hldji3cky"=
))))
>>>
>>> Both recipes are telling that they use the same source.  So the daemon
>>> cleverly saves one download since it already has the thing with that
>>> hash on disk.  See?  :-)
>>
>> Thanks for the reply!
>>
>> I thought about this and, before posting, I also tried with an hash
>> where the first character was changed from '0' to '6'. It gave the
>> same result, even after deleting any existing 'emacs-dash' and
>> 'emacs-s' derivation in the store. In my understanding that shouldn't
>> happen. Is that correct?
>
> Right, but we=E2=80=99d have to check the exact sequence of actions that =
you
> took.

Basically I did:

1. write the package for emacs-dash
2. guix build emacs-dash
3. copy emacs-dash and make emacs-s out of it, keeping the hash unchanged
4. guix build emacs-s

Boom: in the generated derivation I find dash.el instead of s.el.

5. change the first char of the hash 0->6

Boom: same.

6. change the full hash to a sequence of 6s.

OK, now I get the expected result.

7. change hash, rebuild and inspect.

Regards,
Fede