[lfs-dev] [lfs-support] Incorrect MD5 for /development/lfs-bootscripts-20170626.tar.bz2

[Ken Moffat]

I'm getting an incorrect hash for the lfs-bootscripts file. This is using
the development branch. Can anyone attempt to repeat my finding or
provide guidance? I apologize in advance if it is bad form to email this
list about the development version.

First, it's perfectly fine to ask about problems building the dev
book on this list. But, based on what I note below I'll Cc: the
-dev list because I didn't expect this.

Thanks,
Nate
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/development/lfs-bootscripts-20170626.tar.bz2
4d886e7f5c3b092991cd0c56f3d8aa31
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter03/packages.html

I wonder if we have somehow switched to regenerating these ? My
local copy (downloaded on 19th July) has

c8c20c854d7590662ae04f21949566ea

The 8.1 book, which uses these, says

d4992527d67f28e2d0c12e3495422eab

and my last local svn version (20171219) says

18d03cfa9259542b918cc14c43bdaa9e

Looking at the files in trunk/BOOK I have that tarball there, with
that (18d0...) md5sum. Comparing the extracted files, nothing has
changed but the tarballs are very different.

Hmm, extracting both local tarballs, and running ls -lR, I can see
that some timestamps differ, e.g. lfs/init.d is dated 29th June in
my last local version, but 19th July in trhe earleir version.
Similarly the dates of checkfs vary by 10 days, and for cleanfs by
24 days. That is bizarre.

I first suspected that for some reason we have changed to recreating
this tarball even when nothing has changed. But I'm surprised nobody
has commented on this before, at least as far as I remember.

But those random date variations (both dates for cleanfs are in
2012) look very odd.

ĸen

[Bruce Dubbs]

Post by Ken Moffat

I'm getting an incorrect hash for the lfs-bootscripts file. This is using
the development branch. Can anyone attempt to repeat my finding or
provide guidance? I apologize in advance if it is bad form to email this
list about the development version.

First, it's perfectly fine to ask about problems building the dev
book on this list. But, based on what I note below I'll Cc: the
-dev list because I didn't expect this.

Thanks,
Nate
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/development/lfs-bootscripts-20170626.tar.bz2
4d886e7f5c3b092991cd0c56f3d8aa31
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter03/packages.html

I wonder if we have somehow switched to regenerating these ? My
local copy (downloaded on 19th July) has
c8c20c854d7590662ae04f21949566ea
The 8.1 book, which uses these, says
d4992527d67f28e2d0c12e3495422eab

And that matches what is in
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/8.1/lfs-bootscripts-20170626.tar.bz2

The script that rebuilds the book daily also repackages the boot scripts
and the timestamps will change each time, even though the content does not.

On my local system, the tarballs are not rebuilt without a change to the
file name because I do not do a fresh checkout of the sources into an
empty directory like the daily scripts do.

I could update the md5sum in the on-line book daily, but I think that
would also cause problems.

I suppose I could come up with a way to put in a note that would only
generate in the development versions of the book(s), but right now I think
it is more effort than it is worth. The daily build script has been
unchanged for 18 months and this it the first anyone noticed.


All this applies to the lfs systemd development version and blfs tarballs
also.

-- Bruce

[Thomas Trepl via lfs-dev]

Post by Bruce Dubbs

Post by Ken Moffat

I'm getting an incorrect hash for the lfs-bootscripts file. This is using
the development branch. Can anyone attempt to repeat my finding or
provide guidance? I apologize in advance if it is bad form to email this
list about the development version.

First, it's perfectly fine to ask about problems building the dev
book on this list. But, based on what I note below I'll Cc: the
-dev list because I didn't expect this.

Thanks,
Nate
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/development/lfs-bootscripts-20170626.tar.bz2
4d886e7f5c3b092991cd0c56f3d8aa31
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter03/packages.html

I wonder if we have somehow switched to regenerating these ? My
local copy (downloaded on 19th July) has
c8c20c854d7590662ae04f21949566ea
The 8.1 book, which uses these, says
d4992527d67f28e2d0c12e3495422eab

And that matches what is in
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/8.1/lfs-bootscripts-20170626.tar.bz2
The script that rebuilds the book daily also repackages the boot scripts
and the timestamps will change each time, even though the content does not.
On my local system, the tarballs are not rebuilt without a change to the
file name because I do not do a fresh checkout of the sources into an
empty directory like the daily scripts do.
I could update the md5sum in the on-line book daily, but I think that
would also cause problems.
I suppose I could come up with a way to put in a note that would only
generate in the development versions of the book(s), but right now I think
it is more effort than it is worth. The daily build script has been
unchanged for 18 months and this it the first anyone noticed.
All this applies to the lfs systemd development version and blfs tarballs
also.

Today I came across that issue too because i want to build a 8.3
system (for some reference purposes) and failed because of that chksum
mismatches.

Currently there are again 3 chksums for lfs-bootscripts-
20180820.tar.bz2 - one in 8.3, one in devel and one at the file i
previously downloaded in August - all different ...

Isn't there really no way to (re)package the bootscripts a) when
changes has been made AND b) with a new version number?

--
Thomas

[Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev]

Post by Thomas Trepl via lfs-dev
Today I came across that issue too because i want to build a 8.3
system (for some reference purposes) and failed because of that chksum
mismatches.
Currently there are again 3 chksums for lfs-bootscripts-
20180820.tar.bz2 - one in 8.3, one in devel and one at the file i
previously downloaded in August - all different ...
Isn't there really no way to (re)package the bootscripts a) when
changes has been made AND b) with a new version number?

The md5sum changes every time the tarball is created due to timestamps.
For -devel, they are rebuilt daily with the book from files extracted
from svn, even if there are no changes.

For 8.3, the md5sum in the downloads directory should match the what is
in the md5sums file in that same directory and what is in the book.
Both files are also in:

http://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/lfs/lfs-packages/lfs-packages-8.3.tar

Are you finding something different?

-- Bruce