[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: downloading a tarball

From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
Subject: Re: downloading a tarball
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:14:20 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0

Ben (can I trust you now?),

On 24/03/17 13:26, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
> The correct hash is 0py8hsspvwjlckg2xi7jcpj0frrp2qbmsy9x55fx0knnwbhdg5d2.

I'm afraid it's the other way round. ;-)

> `/gnu/store/' should
> have sha256 hash `0py8hsspvwjlckg2xi7jcpj0frrp2qbmsy9x55fx0knnwbhdg5d2',
> instead has `1g8ds7wbhsa4hdcn77xc2c0l3vvz5bx2hx9ng9c9n7aii92ymfnk'

The first hash is what's expected, the second is what was actually
received. What's ‘correct’ is of course not always clear.

‘guix hash’ on my manually downloaded copy returns
I did no further checking.

> HTH - speaking from experience making the same mistake here..

I suspect most people have. The message isn't as clear as it could be.

It doesn't help that IIRC Nix and Guix differ(ed) in which hash they
place first. So much fun when dual-'ixing.

I considered changing the wording of this a long time ago to say
something more like ‘expecting ..., got ...’. Like most people, I just
got used to it. Perhaps I should have sent that patch anyway.

Kind regards,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]