Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#33790 - [linux] Fat-3.6.x.patch MD5 Difference

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Mark E. Lee (bluerider) - Saturday, 09 February 2013, 21:03 GMT
Last edited by Evangelos Foutras (foutrelis) - Sunday, 10 February 2013, 02:23 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To Evangelos Foutras (foutrelis)
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:
I grabbed the source files for linux 3.7.6-1 from the [core] repository. When I attempted to compile the kernel, I was notified that the Fat-3.6.x.patch failed the md5sum validity check. After updating the PKGBUIlD with the output of md5sum on the patch, the kernel compiled fine. The md5sum of Fat-3.6.x.patch should be verified.

Additional info:
Linux 3.7.6-1

Steps to reproduce:
Attempt to compile the kernel from the PKGBUILD in the [core] repository.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Evangelos Foutras (foutrelis)
Sunday, 10 February 2013, 02:23 GMT
Reason for closing:  Not a bug
Additional comments about closing:  Whitespace is not perfectly retained during the Subversion -> Git repository conversion. I may try to fix this in the future, but that may never happen due to various reasons. Correct sources, however, can be obtained using ABS.
Comment by Evangelos Foutras (foutrelis) - Saturday, 09 February 2013, 23:35 GMT
The checksum is correct. Please get the source files from ABS and not the website.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Build_System
Comment by Mark E. Lee (bluerider) - Sunday, 10 February 2013, 01:29 GMT
Compiled from ABS and the checksum checked out. Is there a reason why pulling from the website (pulled as plain text) would be different than the package provided in ABS?
Comment by Evangelos Foutras (foutrelis) - Sunday, 10 February 2013, 02:17 GMT
I'd guess it's a flaw in the script [1] that generates the Git mirror from the original Subversion repository. (A bit of whitespace gets mangled.)

In the case discussed here, fat-3.6.x.patch from the Git mirror is missing the single space in front of the context lines.

The underlying issue is of very low priority since the Git repos are used mainly as a quick reference to a package's history.

[1] https://github.com/foutrelis/arch-svntogit/blob/master/update-repos.sh

Loading...