Efraim Flashner transcribed 4.1K bytes: > On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 06:56:51AM +0000, ng0 wrote: > > Leo Famulari transcribed 2.3K bytes: > > > On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 10:15:47AM +0000, ng0 wrote: > > > > ----- Forwarded message ----- > > > > > > > > > Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 18:21:19 +0900 (JST) > > > > > To: ng0 > > > > > Cc: daisuken@users.sourceforge.net > > > > > Subject: Re: why has the hash for libpng-apng 1.6.28 changed? > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I calculated the hash for libpng-apng files on my local orignals. > > > > > > > > > > md5sum > > > > > 9f2b36bccf89c5f4097111f0f73c1798 libpng-1.6.28-apng.patch.README.txt > > > > > fca7c6d87c8352e645facefc2e1dd153 libpng-1.6.28-apng.patch.gz > > > > > > > > > > sha1sum > > > > > cb620589ecf9c28a4ecc00e6225dd41ca660a959 libpng-1.6.28-apng.patch.README.txt > > > > > 4fa952f5ad374fce8d478b7e54ee4298a0b8d159 libpng-1.6.28-apng.patch.gz > > > > > > > > > > Local file time stamps are > > > > > 2017-01-06 21:02:10.938833896 +0900 libpng-1.6.28-apng.patch.README.txt > > > > > 2017-01-06 21:02:10.938833896 +0900 libpng-1.6.28-apng.patch.gz > > > > > > > > > > That values equals on sourceforge.net. > > > > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/libpng-apng/files/libpng16/1.6.28/ > > > > > > > > > > I don't really understand what happend, but it look just fine. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > --- > > > > > daisuken@users.sourceforge.net > > > > > > Okay, this doesn't help us, so we need to inspect the different tarballs > > > ourselves. Do you have an old copy of the patch you can share? > > > > Yes. I mean no. I am not sure. I have libpng-apng git checkout > > and also the 1.6.25 extracted tarball directory (but not sure > > when I got it), and the tarballs for 1.6.5 and 1.6.28. > > > > But I think I found our problem: > > > > user@shadownet ~/re-src$ guix hash tarballs/libpng-1.6.28-apng.patch.gz > > 0m5nv70n9903x3xzxw9qqc6sgf2rp106ha0x6gix0xf8wcrljaab > > user@shadownet ~/re-src$ guix hash tarballs/libpng-1.6.25-apng.patch.gz > > 026r0gbkf6d6v54wca02cdxln8sj4m2c1yk62sj2aasv2ki2ffh5 > > > > (inputs > > `(("apng" ,(origin > > (method url-fetch) > > (uri > > (string-append "mirror://sourceforge/libpng-apng/libpng16/" > > version "/libpng-" version "-apng.patch.gz")) > > (sha256 > > (base32 > > "026r0gbkf6d6v54wca02cdxln8sj4m2c1yk62sj2aasv2ki2ffh5")))))) > > > > My really strong guess is that we never updated the hash for > > libpng-apng when the libpng was updated fron which libpng-apng > > inherits its version. > > > > I don't have the time to look at our git history right now, > > but you could do that, look at wether libpng-apng was touched > > since 1.6.25->1.6.28 update of libpng. > > > > git blame shows that back in February I updated libpng to 1.6.28 from > 1.6.25, but that the last time libpng-apng was touched was by ng0 back > in January. > > commit: 864738baaa7bb75c08647ccfc684736479e67f7f Okay, so I will send the update for libpng-apng (which due to its inheritance of libpng is just the hash) and I will also add a second commit which adds a comment above libpng that we must update libpng-apng when we update libpng, if that's already possible (libpng-apng might not immediately be up to date, but we don't update libpng immediately aswell due to it being a core-updates candidate). > > -- > Efraim Flashner אפרים פלשנר > GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 > Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted -- ng0 GnuPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588 GnuPG: https://n0is.noblogs.org/my-keys https://www.infotropique.org https://krosos.org