Possible hash mismatch in barrier 2.4.0

  • Done
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
2 participants
  • Vishakh Kumar
  • Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
Vishakh Kumar
Severity
normal
V
V
Vishakh Kumar wrote on 19 Jun 2022 08:25
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
87czf55fud.fsf@gmail.com
Hey there!

Am trying to install barrier on my computer and guix tells me
there is a
hash mismatch. I’m 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

Toggle quote (32 lines)
> 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
> [##################] 100.0%
> building
> /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv…
> /r:sha256 hash mismatch for
> /gnu/store/s7ivxx684bd34bzmgdc282kw1lsg407r-barrier-2.4.0-checkout:
> expected hash:
> 10xk9szxxnqgfym53mcd9hqj1cw2ipncmiixw3i3ajlj1vn88qh1
> actual hash:
> 19bwa9qidq2mxv1fkyxxc1xdmv3jx6bj35bkaaw70jzkblnfmlfs
> hash mismatch for store item
> ’/gnu/store/s7ivxx684bd34bzmgdc282kw1lsg407r-barrier-2.4.0-checkout’
> build of
> /gnu/store/lba0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv
> failed
> View build log at
> ’/var/log/guix/drvs/lb/a0pd5a1hzzfbcswgx0ws1nrldfxxnp-barrier-2.4.0-checkout.drv.bz2’.
> cannot build derivation
> `/gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-barrier-2.4.0.drv’:
> 1 dependencies couldn’t be built
> guix install: error: build of
> `/gnu/store/0lwma8nhhy18z8x5v8zjjhk740bm1mv9-barrier-2.4.0.drv’
> failed
Attachment: file
T
T
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote on 19 Jun 2022 17:28
(name . Vishakh Kumar)(address . grokkingstuff@gmail.com)
87v8sw3bws@nckx
Hi!

Thanks for reporting this.

Vishakh Kumar ???
Toggle quote (3 lines)
> 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
is correct at the time of packaging, then upstream goes and moves
a perfectly good git tag instead of making a new one, and the hash
becomes wrong in retrospect.

This case was different: the original packager correctly ran ‘guix
hash -rx .’ on their clone of the barrier git repository, but did
not first check out the submodules and was unaware that these
affect the hash. I don't think the original package ever built,
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]:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCYq9B8w0cbWVAdG9iaWFz
LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15NtkBAJRAgTX4ZE3O96yvdhdezR3ApYhtGfZiXwelTsT+
ZCAoAQD4sxHhNgzNAi8nX6d2bZgibxo8NUPGZ2mEpNNvcpwCBA==
=btCu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 56091@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 56091
Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)
mumi am -- -s
Or, compose a reply to this issue
mumi compose
Or, send patches to this issue
mumi send-email *.patch