From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 02 13:05:32 2017 Received: (at 28659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Oct 2017 17:05:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44459 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dz49r-0006dK-VF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:05:32 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33850) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dz49q-0006d8-1z for 28659@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:05:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dz49g-0005cy-IE for 28659@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:05:24 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:43685) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dz49P-0005Mm-Ol; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:05:03 -0400 Received: from peder.onsbrabantnet.nl ([88.159.206.46]:50868 helo=dundal.peder.onsbrabantnet.nl) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dz49P-0004qJ-Bk; Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:05:03 -0400 From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: bug#28659: v0.13: guix pull fails; libgit2-0.26.0 and 0.25.1 content hashes fail Organization: AvatarAcademy.nl References: <877ewf18d4.fsf@gnu.org> <87o9ppoabw.fsf@gnu.org> X-Url: http://AvatarAcademy.nl Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 19:05:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87o9ppoabw.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Mon, 02 Oct 2017 17:09:39 +0200") Message-ID: <87infx8oqr.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 28659 Cc: 28659@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: -5.0 (-----) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > What=E2=80=99s sad here is that we do have the right tarball at: > > https://mirror.hydra.gnu.org/file/libgit2-0.25.1.tar.gz/sha256/1cdwcw38= frc1wf28x5ppddazv9hywc718j92f3xa3ybzzycyds3s Sad indeed! > The problem is that the hash check is performed by guix-daemon itself, > not by =E2=80=9Cguix perform-download=E2=80=9D. So when guix-daemon diag= noses a hash > mismatch, it=E2=80=99s too late and we cannot try again and use the > content-addressed mirror. Why don't we try our content-addressed mirror first? > A crude but helpful fix would be to have perform-download compute the > hash by itself and act accordingly. It=E2=80=99s crude because that mean= s that > we=E2=80=99d be computing the hash twice: once in =E2=80=98guix perform-d= ownload=E2=80=99 and a > second time in guix-daemon. For archives below ~20=C2=A0MiB it=E2=80=99s= probably OK > though. > > Thoughts? We may want more guix hackers' viewpoints here, I don't feel very qualified...As this would be a temporary workaround only until we have > In the future, with the daemon written in Guile, it=E2=80=99s one area wh= ere we > could achieve better integration and coordination among the various > pieces. ...it might be fine? Do we want/need to bring out a new release for this, e.g. 0.13.1, or even 0.14? I'm not sure how bad it is that --no-substitutes does not work. I think working on guix pull to not compile everything locally may have priority? janneke --=20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE http://AvatarAcademy.com