From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jun 19 09:43:20 2022 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jun 2022 13:43:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50926 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o2vCx-00061t-5V for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 09:43:20 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:54892) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o2oQY-0000b7-CI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 02:28:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58484) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o2oQY-0003JR-5S for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 02:28:54 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::430]:39436) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o2oQW-0001Wx-Fs for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 02:28:53 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id k22so4125694wrd.6 for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 23:28:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=BT4UGzwhXVd6Nr9oOD56O+OjE6FvVmfLqTuuDB+2Qb8=; b=K45K1CeEvcGnQJ1zY1w9jzL8nRN8f20fXaGhTx/3s4wNm+emKNWlaiLTiTEHLo8/YM qiJTyvpxcc6NwOZ/5iIELlVamXerCxPlfJrrGpZCMpl9RQBgAdM8BoSchleASD1V0zGP 046DX8EJEJqfyi1FaJq85BCpe5vbrih7p8ZFAWCFzex2AC7yDSUHqD+P2dgUBxmCqChg gvWCKmaiWdEyqSRBkU8zUhg+o9rtq4KrpFr0/J0+nPX1NzUCGhFD5JKBrZC9QqUSs7k/ bkbRkwgFzq3C2nk2LnZTRIMvE2I9r0UzR1zFbxdXFLaiECBw6MOikRhZZSmyf/7kVrjP iqIA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :mime-version; bh=BT4UGzwhXVd6Nr9oOD56O+OjE6FvVmfLqTuuDB+2Qb8=; b=ENayzjrtNh1eG98Ac7+sgLX8ikyQHKqlUF6KnI1hEtUcFrXA4gtpd2DAEXCIJZLvQp d/psTbPRzT3MljRrwnPzl9rkzTQUffOVhD7BYq1b37IjimUDhwPx3esZ2u68vlk3I4lU n44+I5p/1Db1gsNvpNKPw5csnIwWlwO6bSxVj58c/nHtAgWWMBKRhkwrrdBWB7WQ1cv7 TD8GqvuPMPJYED7fIujuqbLf2W68HQo2Wuj3ZR8ya5312tacXBLoGkHz/i8WZv+MXZ1v 84wcXOhloKfkQYHzjX1XGK3fWYQ+dvilBWmKS+xVFLuaZQuF+DfWChBJkZ74y5+6Uedb nQ6w== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/fJ+uf6WG+j+DK9DoURMDF7+bbD9YEctjLY8b5nnbWkJI6veKE MQoVHnj8sI2rJu3k3lWz0PpIBY7vt73U0g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1t6DTr0IqSVuK1IUcS1RgsnJKTV57qSOsSoFOBN8IO2a7ik/vK12RHedoV4zPKCUjh3R7D5BQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:47a1:0:b0:218:423a:de8f with SMTP id 1-20020a5d47a1000000b00218423ade8fmr17232908wrb.420.1655620130341; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 23:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grokkingNoether ([94.204.51.223]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k190-20020a1ca1c7000000b0039c587342d8sm14453872wme.3.2022.06.18.23.28.49 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 18 Jun 2022 23:28:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Vishakh Kumar To: bug-guix@gnu.org Subject: Possible hash mismatch in barrier 2.4.0 Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 10:25:44 +0400 Message-ID: <87czf55fud.fsf@gmail.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.11; emacs 29.0.50 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::430; envelope-from=grokkingstuff@gmail.com; helo=mail-wr1-x430.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 09:43:18 -0400 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) --=-=-= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="==-=-=" --==-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey there! Am trying to install barrier on my computer and guix tells me=20 there is a hash mismatch. I=E2=80=99m able to install other applications, and I think= =20 this is a case where the hash in the package description might be=20 wrong? More than happy to provide more info, please let me know how i can=20 help debug this. Cheers, Vishakh Kumar > grokkingstuff@grokkingNoether ~$ guix install barrier > The following package will be installed: > barrier 2.4.0 > > The following derivations will be built: > /gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-barrier-2.4.0.drv > /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv > > 15.1 MB will be downloaded > qtbase-5.15.2 14.4MiB 31KiB/s 07:54=20 > [##################] 100.0% > building=20 > /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv=E2= =80=A6 > /r:sha256 hash mismatch for=20 > /gnu/store/s7ivxx684bd34bzmgdc282kw1lsg407r-barrier-2.4.0-checkout: > expected hash:=20 > 10xk9szxxnqgfym53mcd9hqj1cw2ipncmiixw3i3ajlj1vn88qh1 > actual hash:=20 > 19bwa9qidq2mxv1fkyxxc1xdmv3jx6bj35bkaaw70jzkblnfmlfs > hash mismatch for store item=20 > =E2=80=99/gnu/store/s7ivxx684bd34bzmgdc282kw1lsg407r-barrier-2.4.0-checko= ut=E2=80=99 > build of=20 > /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv=20 > failed > View build log at=20 > =E2=80=99/var/log/guix/drvs/lb/a0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4= .0-checkout.drv.bz2=E2=80=99. > cannot build derivation=20 > `/gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-barrier-2.4.0.drv=E2=80=99:= =20 > 1 dependencies couldn=E2=80=99t be built > guix install: error: build of=20 > `/gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-barrier-2.4.0.drv=E2=80=99=20 > failed --==-=-= Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hey there!

Am trying to install barrier on my computer and guix tells me there is a hash mismatch. I=E2=80=99m able to install other applications, and I think = this is a case where the hash in the package description might be wrong?

More than happy to provide more info, please let me know how i can help debug this.

Cheers, Vishakh Kumar

grokkingstuff@grokkingNoether ~$ guix install barrier The following package will be installed: barrier 2.4.0

The following derivations will be built: /gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-barrier-2.4.0.drv /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv

15.1 MB will be downloaded qtbase-5.15.2 14.4MiB 31KiB/s 07:54 [##################] 1= 00.0% building /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout= .drv=E2=80=A6 /r:sha256 hash mismatch for /gnu/store/s7ivxx684bd34bzmgdc282kw1lsg407r-bar= rier-2.4.0-checkout: expected hash: 10xk9szxxnqgfym53mcd9hqj1cw2ipncmiixw3i3ajlj1vn88qh1 actual hash: 19bwa9qidq2mxv1fkyxxc1xdmv3jx6bj35bkaaw70jzkblnfmlfs hash mismatch for store item =E2=80=99/gnu/store/s7ivxx684bd34bzmgdc282kw1l= sg407r-barrier-2.4.0-checkout=E2=80=99 build of /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout= .drv failed View build log at =E2=80=99/var/log/guix/drvs/lb/a0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldf= xxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv.bz2=E2=80=99. cannot build derivation `/gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-barrie= r-2.4.0.drv=E2=80=99: 1 dependencies couldn=E2=80=99t be built guix install: error: build of `/gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-= barrier-2.4.0.drv=E2=80=99 failed

--==-=-=-- --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jun 19 11:33:11 2022 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jun 2022 15:33:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52886 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o2wvG-0001HI-NI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 11:33:11 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:36730) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o2wvD-0001H7-82 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 11:33:07 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47430) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o2wvD-0000UK-1M for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 11:33:07 -0400 Received: from tobias.gr ([2a02:c205:2020:6054::1]:48452) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o2wvA-0003JK-I6 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jun 2022 11:33:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2018; bh=nMjh99+TjqQx1 pKehrN4n9fX82Y1X2WCX65Max3ou3E=; h=in-reply-to:date:subject:cc:to: from:references; d=tobias.gr; b=NcAxS9QTRiOpanmHUwMFet5nYDYhwdobIOMtOI skkOclZpN7Z3awPLggFWQeo38RjBJ2m1fjHbE17pS9CRFIZOeiWlgwcqIaQrOoY+FQCMEh bFkYdbCRhAHRml8d4FGmOccrfXlUSGlfqm+49RrxYYkdszY7zF8j63jrVcwukOHqJxcwEQ wgP/8VhZMuH4xcqrT6BOHS6eupRSv8xPleDlR0ui0PBLKDleJ9B8y+m9SviOg/q4MGZgLe PLiPmql12No5GH23LZHy6m1u4yqwaY6iv8TWnd5jAiA537RcN7PYRDpyWw4TlvkDom+ZF5 hkzu7I3areSLV3h4zthKeMtQ== Received: by submission.tobias.gr (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id efb4d819 (TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO); Sun, 19 Jun 2022 15:33:00 +0000 (UTC) References: <87czf55fud.fsf@gmail.com> From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice To: Vishakh Kumar Subject: Re: bug#56091: Possible hash mismatch in barrier 2.4.0 Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 17:28:53 +0200 In-reply-to: <87czf55fud.fsf@gmail.com> BIMI-Selector: v=BIMI1; s=default; Message-ID: <87v8sw3bws@nckx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:c205:2020:6054::1; envelope-from=me@tobias.gr; helo=tobias.gr X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org, 56091-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi! Thanks for reporting this. Vishakh Kumar =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > I think this is a case where the hash in the package description > might be wrong? What usually (though, mercifully, rarely) happens is that the hash=20 is correct at the time of packaging, then upstream goes and moves=20 a perfectly good git tag instead of making a new one, and the hash=20 becomes wrong in retrospect. This case was different: the original packager correctly ran =E2=80=98guix= =20 hash -rx .=E2=80=99 on their clone of the barrier git repository, but did=20 not first check out the submodules and was unaware that these=20 affect the hash. I don't think the original package ever built,=20 or at least fail to see how it could have. Fixed on master[0]. Closing, but could you guix pull & confirm that it works for you? Kind regards, T G-R [0]:=20 https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=3D7f1cb1ebca169e3a4b5= ed59fe226bb614b18b57f --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCYq9B8w0cbWVAdG9iaWFz LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15NtkBAJRAgTX4ZE3O96yvdhdezR3ApYhtGfZiXwelTsT+ ZCAoAQD4sxHhNgzNAi8nX6d2bZgibxo8NUPGZ2mEpNNvcpwCBA== =btCu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From unknown Sun Aug 17 22:07:14 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:24:12 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator