Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
[...]
>> Oops. Here we go:
>>
>> modified nix/libstore/build.cc
>> @@ -2449,8 +2449,11 @@ void DerivationGoal::registerOutputs()
>> Hash h2 = recursive ? hashPath(ht, actualPath).first :
>> hashFile(ht, actualPath);
>> if (h != h2)
>> throw BuildError(
>> - format("output path `%1%' should have %2% hash `%3%',
>> instead has `%4%'")
>> - % path % i->second.hashAlgo % printHash16or32(h) %
>> printHash16or32(h2));
>> + format("%1% hash mismatch for output path `%2%'\n"
>> + " expected: %3%\n"
>> + " actual: %4%")
>> + % i->second.hashAlgo % path
>> + % printHash16or32(h) % printHash16or32(h2));
>> }
>>
>> /* Get rid of all weird permissions. This also checks that
>> @@ -3096,7 +3099,9 @@ void SubstitutionGoal::finished()
>> Hash expectedHash = parseHash16or32(hashType,
>> string(expectedHashStr, n + 1));
>> Hash actualHash = hashType == htSHA256 ? hash.first :
>> hashPath(hashType, destPath).first;
>> if (expectedHash != actualHash)
>> - throw SubstError(format("hash mismatch in downloaded path
>> `%1%': expected %2%, got %3%")
>> + throw SubstError(format("hash mismatch in downloaded path
>> `%1%'\n"
>> + " expected: %2%\n"
>> + " actual: %3%")
>> % storePath % printHash(expectedHash) %
>> printHash(actualHash));
>> }
>>
>> Should we apply it?
>
> Yes, please. This looks much better! Thank you!
Applied!
Ludo’.
