[bug#51307] [PATCH 0/2] guix hash: eases conversion

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> skribis:

>  2. Using the option recursive changes the result for tarball, as with:
>
>       $ guix hash $(guix build hello -S)
>       0ssi1wpaf7plaswqqjwigppsg5fyh99vdlb9kzl7c9lng89ndq1i
>
>       $ guix hash $(guix build hello -S) --recursive
>       1qx3qqk86vgdvpqkhpgzq3gfcxmys29wzfizjb9asn4crbn503x9
>
>     And I am not able to imagine a case.  To me, it should be a fixed-point.
>     That’s what the first patch correct.

That’s expected: ‘--recursive’ uses a different computation method,
including file metadata (technically, it serializes the file as a nar
and computes the hash of the nar).

[...]

> Then, working on Disarchive which uses base16 as encoding, it is annoying
> twice,
>
>   a) because it requires to download when all the sources
>   b) because it sometimes requires to apply patches
>
> Compare,
>
>   $ guix hash $(guix build ceph -S)
>   0ppd362s177cc47g75v0k27j7aaf27qc31cbbh0j2g30wmhl8gj7
>
> with the checksum in the package definition:
> 0lmdri415hqczc9565s5m5568pnj97ipqxgnw6085kps0flwq5zh.
>
> With the second patch, it becomes easy to convert the checksum from upstream:
>
>   $ ./pre-inst-env guix hash ceph -f base16
>   f017cca903face8280e1f6757ce349d25e644aa945175312fb0cc31248ccad52
>
> and nothing is downloaded.  Get the checksum of what Guix really builds is
> done via the current way, for instance,
>
>    $ guix hash $(guix build ceph -S) -f base16
>    473e4461e5603c21015c8b85c1f0114ea9238f986097f30e61ec9ca08519ed5e
>
> and the second patch allows to convert the checksum from the package
> definition (without downloading).

Ah yes, got it.  (I should read messages in the right order, oops!)

An obvious problem with the interface you propose is that it’s
ambiguous: are you printing the hash of the ‘ceph’ package, or computing
that of the ‘ceph’ file?  I’m sure the Zen of Python has something on
ambiguity.  ;-)

Do you think there’s another place where we could provide helpers for
the die-hard Disarchive hackers among us?  Maybe we could get ‘guix lint
-c archival’ to print Disarchive URLs upon failure, and that’d already
help?

WDYT?

Thanks!

Ludo’.