!!! Digest verification failed:
!!! /usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2
!!! Reason: Filesize does not match recorded size
!!! Got: 37480419
!!! Expected: 6794016
Is there a problem with the digest? Is there a work around? Any help would be appreciated. If this is a bug, I'll report it.
Bob
02-17-2008, 12:07 PM
Alexander Meinke
Digest verification failed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Robert Stockdale IV wrote:
| * checking firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2 ;-)
| ...
| [ !! ]
|
| !!! Digest verification failed:
| !!! /usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2
| !!! Reason: Filesize does not match recorded size
| !!! Got: 37480419
| !!! Expected: 6794016
|
| Is there a problem with the digest? Is there a work around? Any help
| would be appreciated. If this is a bug, I'll report it.
| Bob
Maybe you should try emerge --sync before emerging firefox.
iD8DBQFHuDGcYCx19pTB5PERAp7OAJ4/I2X0c9QewMTNonz1CBQsh/0EuACePrhC
8qR4bYIiHGLikM6CEo/vRm8=
=SU1q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
02-17-2008, 01:04 PM
"Robert Stockdale IV"
Digest verification failed
On Feb 17, 2008 8:07 AM, Alexander Meinke <ameinke@online.de> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Robert Stockdale IV wrote:
| ** checking firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2 ;-)
| ...
| [ !! ]
|
| !!! Digest verification failed:
| !!! /usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2
| !!! Reason: Filesize does not match recorded size
| !!! Got: 37480419
| !!! Expected: 6794016
|
| Is there a problem with the digest? Is there a work around? Any help
| would be appreciated. If this is a bug, I'll report it.
| Bob
Maybe you should try emerge --sync before emerging firefox.
iD8DBQFHuDGcYCx19pTB5PERAp7OAJ4/I2X0c9QewMTNonz1CBQsh/0EuACePrhC
8qR4bYIiHGLikM6CEo/vRm8=
=SU1q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
I did "emerge --sync" I also ran eix-sync as well which does that and more.Still have the same issue.
Bob
02-17-2008, 01:15 PM
Kenneth Prugh
Digest verification failed
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 08:03:21 -0500
"Robert Stockdale IV" <bobstockdale@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been trying to complete a
> glsa-check -f affected
> for the past 2 days.
> The latest problem I have encountered is:
>
> >>> Downloading '
> http://distfiles.gentoo.org/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2'
> --02:17:55--
> http://distfiles.gentoo.org/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2
> => `/usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2'
> Resolving distfiles.gentoo.org... 156.56.247.195, 140.211.166.134,
> 216.165.129.135, ...
> Connecting to distfiles.gentoo.org|156.56.247.195|:80... connected.
> HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
> Length: 37,480,419 (36M) [application/x-tar]
>
> 100%[================================================== ================================================== ================>]
> 37,480,419 236.84K/s ETA 00:00
>
> 02:20:36 (228.12 KB/s) - `/usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-
> 2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2' saved [37480419/37480419]
>
> * mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.11-patches-0.5.tar.bz2 RMD160 SHA1 SHA256
> size ;-) ...
> [ ok ]
> * checking ebuild checksums ;-)
> ...
> [ ok ]
> * checking auxfile checksums ;-)
> ...
> [ ok ]
> * checking miscfile checksums ;-)
> ...
> [ ok ]
> * checking firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2 ;-)
> ...
> [ !! ]
>
> !!! Digest verification failed:
> !!! /usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2
> !!! Reason: Filesize does not match recorded size
> !!! Got: 37480419
> !!! Expected: 6794016
>
> Is there a problem with the digest? Is there a work around? Any help
> would be appreciated. If this is a bug, I'll report it.
> Bob
A temporary solution:
cd /usr/portage/www-client/mozilla-firefox/ && rm Manifest && ebuild
mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.12.ebuild manifest
Then try to emerge it.
--
Ken69267
Gentoo AMD64 AT
02-17-2008, 01:25 PM
Neil Bothwick
Digest verification failed
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:15:06 -0500, Kenneth Prugh wrote:
> A temporary solution:
>
> cd /usr/portage/www-client/mozilla-firefox/ && rm Manifest && ebuild
> mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.12.ebuild manifest
s/temporary/terrible/
This message means that either the portage tree contains the wrong
checksum for a valid file, or that the file on your mirror has been
replaced by an altered version. Redigesting to fix this problem is like
fixing low oil pressure in your car by disconnecting the warning light.
By all means feel free to take his risk on your own system, but please
don't recommend others to do it without at least pointing out the
potentially serious consequences.
To the OP, it is possible that the Firefox archive was updated and you
still have an older one in $DISTDIR. Try deleting your copy and emerging
again. You could also try using a different mirror.
--
Neil Bothwick
"F*ck it" said Pooh, being more forthright than usual.
02-17-2008, 01:32 PM
Kenneth Prugh
Digest verification failed
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:25:11 +0000
Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:15:06 -0500, Kenneth Prugh wrote:
>
> > A temporary solution:
> >
> > cd /usr/portage/www-client/mozilla-firefox/ && rm Manifest && ebuild
> > mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.12.ebuild manifest
>
> s/temporary/terrible/
>
> This message means that either the portage tree contains the wrong
> checksum for a valid file, or that the file on your mirror has been
> replaced by an altered version. Redigesting to fix this problem is
> like fixing low oil pressure in your car by disconnecting the warning
> light.
>
> By all means feel free to take his risk on your own system, but please
> don't recommend others to do it without at least pointing out the
> potentially serious consequences.
>
> To the OP, it is possible that the Firefox archive was updated and you
> still have an older one in $DISTDIR. Try deleting your copy and
> emerging again. You could also try using a different mirror.
>
>
yawn, and if the download was invalid it would most likely fail to
untar or something similar. I fail to see the point. Either way, he can
delete it in distfiles and just remerge/remanifest so it grabs it off
the mirrors.
I also remember why I hate this mailing list and usually just mark all
read.
--
Ken69267
Gentoo AMD64 AT
02-17-2008, 01:47 PM
Neil Bothwick
Digest verification failed
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:32:25 -0500, Kenneth Prugh wrote:
> yawn, and if the download was invalid it would most likely fail to
> untar or something similar. I fail to see the point.
That's because you are assuming that all file corruption is accidental,
whereas the manifest system is designed to protect against malicious
corruption.
> I also remember why I hate this mailing list and usually just mark all
> read.
That is safer that advising people to override portage's security
precautions.
--
Neil Bothwick
Paranoia: A healthy understanding of the nature of the universe.
02-17-2008, 01:52 PM
Etaoin Shrdlu
Digest verification failed
On Sunday 17 February 2008, Kenneth Prugh wrote:
> > !!! Digest verification failed:
> > !!! /usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2
> > !!! Reason: Filesize does not match recorded size
> > !!! Got: 37480419
> > !!! Expected: 6794016
> >
> > Is there a problem with the digest? Is there a work around? Any help
> > would be appreciated. If this is a bug, I'll report it.
> > Bob
>
> A temporary solution:
>
> cd /usr/portage/www-client/mozilla-firefox/ && rm Manifest && ebuild
> mozilla-firefox-2.0.0.12.ebuild manifest
- he is having problem with 2.0.0.11, not 2.0.0.12
- wasn't manual digest regeneration considered a very Bad Thing?
- look at the expected size. It's much bigger than the actual size. This
might be caused by a partially downloaded tarball
in /usr/portage/distfiles. He might try
rm /usr/portage/distfiles/firefox-2.0.0.11-source.tar.bz2 and try
reemerging. That should download the correct tarball.
To the OP: if you just synced, you can do "emerge mozilla-firefox" and
get version 2.0.0.12, which is the current stable version, which I
suppose also fixes the glsa problems (if the glsa is 200712-21).
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
02-17-2008, 01:57 PM
Kenneth Prugh
Digest verification failed
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:47:36 +0000
Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:32:25 -0500, Kenneth Prugh wrote:
>
> > yawn, and if the download was invalid it would most likely fail to
> > untar or something similar. I fail to see the point.
>
> That's because you are assuming that all file corruption is
> accidental, whereas the manifest system is designed to protect
> against malicious corruption.
>
> > I also remember why I hate this mailing list and usually just mark
> > all read.
>
> That is safer that advising people to override portage's security
> precautions.
>
>
You're right I was assuming it was accidental. I also falsely assumed
he already tried another mirror of the file.
I also don't think straight without breakfast, so I'm sorry about the
last email.. it wasn't very professional of me :>
On a side note: the reason I hate -user is it completely breaks claws
when it tries to thread it if there are unread :9. May need to nuke it
and regenerate everything from scratch.
--
Ken69267
Gentoo AMD64 AT
02-17-2008, 11:15 PM
Neil Bothwick
Digest verification failed
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:57:13 -0500, Kenneth Prugh wrote:
> I also don't think straight without breakfast, so I'm sorry about the
> last email.. it wasn't very professional of me :>
How does that differ from the rest of us? :-)
> On a side note: the reason I hate -user is it completely breaks claws
> when it tries to thread it if there are unread
I have no such problem here, but I have Claws set to show only unread
messages.
--
Neil Bothwick
"Bad dog! Leave that wire alone.....click.....###@*##....NO TERRIER
Digest verification failed
