From: "Marcin Niestrój" <m.niestroj@grinn-global.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] linux-firmware: bump version to latest 1baa348
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 18:32:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a7mcvq6j.fsf@grinn-global.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bm6svqpy.fsf@grinn-global.com>
Marcin Niestr?j <m.niestroj@grinn-global.com> writes:
> Hi All,
>
> Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> writes:
>
>> Marcin, Thomas, All,
>>
>> On 2018-11-09 21:57 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
>>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:33:22 +0100, Marcin Niestroj wrote:
>>>
>>> > -sha256 b279ca4d086887c2efab13e28a7ca36e409410d3df38a62d7c7b5799ee3de916 linux-firmware-44d4fca9922a252a0bd81f6307bcc072a78da54a.tar.gz
>>> > +sha256 3e4fcbac18990a14d52159fefdc70081a56c5244adba28b14242e159a748e755 linux-firmware-1baa34868b2c0a004dc595b20678145e3fff83e7.tar.gz
>>>
>>> I am sorry, but this hash is still not good for me, I get:
>>>
>>> 5c636765fd1ac638176893feccfd4a4854f59fc3d01b38f3ccdbb89bd5bb6ef1
>>>
>>> I.e:
>>>
>>> ERROR: linux-firmware-1baa34868b2c0a004dc595b20678145e3fff83e7.tar.gz has wrong sha256 hash:
>>> ERROR: expected: 3e4fcbac18990a14d52159fefdc70081a56c5244adba28b14242e159a748e755
>>> ERROR: got : 5c636765fd1ac638176893feccfd4a4854f59fc3d01b38f3ccdbb89bd5bb6ef1
>>>
>>> And this morning, Yann E. Morin reported having the same hash as me:
>>>
>>> 08:07 < y_morin> kos_tom: I also have a different hash here.
>>> 08:10 < y_morin> kos_tom: FTR, I got: 5c636765fd1ac638176893feccfd4a4854f59fc3d01b38f3ccdbb89bd5bb6ef1
>>
>> Right.
>
> Thank you both for testing.
>
>>
>>> My system tar is 1.29, which is considered as a "good" version by
>>> support/dependencies/check-host-tar.sh. I have nonetheless forced
>>> building host-tar, and I still get the same hash.
>>
>> Recently, another user reported hash issues as well, and it turned out
>> that they had changed gzip to be really pigz (a parallel gzip). Can you
>> check if that is not your case too?
>
> I have investigated the issue on my side. It turns out that gzip is
> really the issue here.
>
> I have two PCs with Arch Linux. PC_1 is the one I have prepared
> linux-firmware. Here gzip package info on that machine:
>
> [mniestroj at gm ~]$ LANG=C yaourt -Si gzip
> Repository : core
> Name : gzip
> Version : 1.9-1
> Description : GNU compression utility
> Architecture : x86_64
> URL : https://www.gnu.org/software/gzip/
> Licenses : GPL3
> Groups : base base-devel
> Provides : None
> Depends On : glibc bash less
> Optional Deps : None
> Conflicts With : None
> Replaces : None
> Download Size : 77.78 KiB
> Installed Size : 150.00 KiB
> Packager : S
> Build Date : Mon Jan 22 00:52:54 2018
> Validated By : MD5 Sum SHA-256 Sum Signature
>
> PC_2 is also Arch Linux, but with slightly more up-to-date
> packages. gzip package info looks like this:
Forgot to mention - on PC_2 I get the right hash (the same as you).
>
> [macius at zm ~]$ LANG=C yaourt -Si gzip
> Repository : core
> Name : gzip
> Version : 1.9-2
> Description : GNU compression utility
> Architecture : x86_64
> URL : https://www.gnu.org/software/gzip/
> Licenses : GPL3
> Groups : base base-devel
> Provides : None
> Depends On : glibc bash less
> Optional Deps : None
> Conflicts With : None
> Replaces : None
> Download Size : 78.14 KiB
> Installed Size : 185.00 KiB
> Packager : Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>
> Build Date : Sat Nov 3 23:10:39 2018
> Validated By : MD5 Sum SHA-256 Sum Signature
>
> You can find differences in package here:
> https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/log/trunk?h=packages/gzip
>
> I have also checked output of gzip command on another PC with pigz
> configured as gzip drop-in replacement. It outputs even different file,
> with different sha256 hash.
>
> I think the overall conclusion is that a host-gzip package is needed,
> just like host-tar. In the meantime I will send v3 of this patch with
> proper hash (the same as you calculated above).
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Yann E. MORIN.
>>
>>> I have uploaded the tarball at
>>> https://bootlin.com/~thomas/pub/linux-firmware-1baa34868b2c0a004dc595b20678145e3fff83e7.tar.gz.
>>> Could you upload the tarball that was generated on your side so that we
>>> can compare them, and see where the problem lies ?
>
> Thank for sharing. After gunzipping your version and mine I ended with
> the same *.tar files. So the difference was clearly because of gzip.
>
> Regards,
> Marcin
>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Thomas
>>> --
>>> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
>>> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
>>> https://bootlin.com
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
--
Marcin Niestr?j
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-13 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-08 15:33 [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] linux-firmware: bump version to latest 1baa348 Marcin Niestroj
2018-11-09 20:57 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-09 21:06 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-11-13 17:20 ` Marcin Niestrój
2018-11-13 17:32 ` Marcin Niestrój [this message]
2018-11-13 20:02 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-13 20:29 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-11-13 20:57 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-13 23:54 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-11-15 19:05 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-11-16 8:35 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-11-20 18:50 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-11-20 23:47 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-11-21 7:13 ` Peter Korsgaard
2018-11-13 21:34 ` Marcin Niestrój
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87a7mcvq6j.fsf@grinn-global.com \
--to=m.niestroj@grinn-global.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox