Bug: 0.9.2 shasum has changed #570

New Issue

chenrui · 2023-08-22T16:21:16Z

chenrui commented

2023-08-22 16:21:16 +00:00

describe the issue (observed vs expected behaviour)

Hello 👋 . I'm a maintainer for the Homebrew project. We noticed that the shasum for v0.9.2 of tea has changed. We wanted to verify this is legitimate before updating it in our repository. Thanks!

Relates to https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/pull/139430.

### describe the issue (observed vs expected behaviour) Hello 👋 . I'm a maintainer for the Homebrew project. We noticed that the shasum for v0.9.2 of tea has changed. We wanted to verify this is legitimate before updating it in our repository. Thanks! Relates to https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/pull/139430.

chenrui added the

kind/bug

label 2023-08-22 16:21:16 +00:00

techknowlogick commented

2023-08-23 02:05:54 +00:00

Hi @chenrui, thank you for opening this ticket (and a thanks for maintaining the homebrew project too). This is due to how git creates the archives. Could you pop over to https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/26620 and make add a comment there, as this is part of an overarching decision we'll have to make due to the nature of how git changed the output.

Or... We also publish source archives of Gitea itself to our downloads site (dl.gitea.com), would that be better for homebrew to track instead as the checksums would be more reliable as they aren't generated on demand.

Hi @chenrui, thank you for opening this ticket (and a thanks for maintaining the homebrew project too). This is due to how git creates the archives. Could you pop over to https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/26620 and make add a comment there, as this is part of an overarching decision we'll have to make due to the nature of how git changed the output. Or... We also publish source archives of Gitea itself to our downloads site (dl.gitea.com), would that be better for homebrew to track instead as the checksums would be more reliable as they aren't generated on demand.

chenrui commented

2023-09-03 15:44:46 +00:00

@techknowlogick just left a note on the github issue.

Or... We also publish source archives of Gitea itself to our downloads site (dl.gitea.com), would that be better for homebrew to track instead as the checksums would be more reliable as they aren't generated on demand.

We (homebrew) can certainly do it. I will update the artifact accordingly. Thanks for the suggestion.

@techknowlogick just left a note on the github issue. > Or... We also publish source archives of Gitea itself to our downloads site (dl.gitea.com), would that be better for homebrew to track instead as the checksums would be more reliable as they aren't generated on demand. We (homebrew) can certainly do it. I will update the artifact accordingly. Thanks for the suggestion.

chenrui commented

2023-09-03 15:46:55 +00:00

actually, I could not find the source tarball in this directory, https://dl.gitea.com/tea/0.9.2/, can you just show me the source tarball there? Thanks!

lunny commented

2023-09-04 04:14:16 +00:00

actually, I could not find the source tarball in this directory, https://dl.gitea.com/tea/0.9.2/, can you just show me the source tarball there? Thanks!

Looks like source tar balls are not released together. But https://gitea.com/gitea/tea/archive/v0.9.2.tar.gz should be the related source.

> actually, I could not find the source tarball in this directory, https://dl.gitea.com/tea/0.9.2/, can you just show me the source tarball there? Thanks! Looks like source tar balls are not released together. But https://gitea.com/gitea/tea/archive/v0.9.2.tar.gz should be the related source.

techknowlogick commented

2023-09-04 04:59:57 +00:00

actually, I could not find the source tarball in this directory, https://dl.gitea.com/tea/0.9.2/, can you just show me the source tarball there? Thanks!

it's only the main Gitea project that publishes its source to dl.gitea.com, but that's something that would probably be good for this project too.

Looks like source tar balls are not released together. But https://gitea.com/gitea/tea/archive/v0.9.2.tar.gz should be the related source.

@lunny the reported issue above is that the hash of that generated file changed due to how git changed how the archives are created.

> actually, I could not find the source tarball in this directory, https://dl.gitea.com/tea/0.9.2/, can you just show me the source tarball there? Thanks! it's only the main Gitea project that publishes its source to dl.gitea.com, but that's something that would probably be good for this project too. > Looks like source tar balls are not released together. But https://gitea.com/gitea/tea/archive/v0.9.2.tar.gz should be the related source. @lunny the reported issue above is that the hash of that generated file changed due to how git changed how the archives are created.

chenrui commented

2023-09-04 14:19:25 +00:00

actually, I could not find the source tarball in this directory, https://dl.gitea.com/tea/0.9.2/, can you just show me the source tarball there? Thanks!

it's only the main Gitea project that publishes its source to dl.gitea.com, but that's something that would probably be good for this project too.

Exactly, if we did for gitea, it might be also good to do it for the other projects as well. Thanks!

> > actually, I could not find the source tarball in this directory, https://dl.gitea.com/tea/0.9.2/, can you just show me the source tarball there? Thanks! > > it's only the main Gitea project that publishes its source to dl.gitea.com, but that's something that would probably be good for this project too. Exactly, if we did for gitea, it might be also good to do it for the other projects as well. Thanks!

Sign in to join this conversation.

No Milestone

No Assignees

3 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: gitea/tea#570