Checksum Failing (Was Re: More mass rebuilds for GCC)

[Janina Sajka]

Really delighted to see the new compat-libstdc++ today, but getting the
following attempting to yum them down:

=============================================================================
Install      0 Package(s)
Update       2 Package(s)
Remove       0 Package(s)
Total download size: 405 k
Downloading Packages:
(1/2): compat-libstdc++-2 100% |=========================| 174 kB
00:00
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/i386/Fedora/RPMS/compat-libstdc%2B%2B-296-2.96-134.i386.rpm:
[Errno -1] Package does not match checksum
Trying other mirror.
(2/2): compat-libstdc++-3 100% |=========================| 230 kB
00:00
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/i386/Fedora/RPMS/compat-libstdc%2B%2B-33-3.2.3-54.fc5.i386.rpm:
[Errno -1] Package does not
match checksum
Trying other mirror.


Error Downloading Packages:
  compat-libstdc++-33 - 3.2.3-54.fc5.i386: failure:
Fedora/RPMS/compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-54.fc5.i386.rpm from development:
[Errno 256] No more mirrors to try.
  compat-libstdc++-296 - 2.96-134.i386: failure:
Fedora/RPMS/compat-libstdc++-296-2.96-134.i386.rpm from development:
[Errno 256] No more mirrors to try.

Peter Robinson writes:
> > > > > As you'll notice, there will be lots more packages bumped for the rebase
> > > > > to gcc.  Most completed today, but we'll be working through a list of
> > > > > failures over the next couple days.  Things will still be in a bit of
> > > > > flux, but we're working on it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Java is still being worked on too.  Getting the java stack built with
> > > > > gcj is a great accomplishment and I really respect our java and gcj team
> > > > > for putting in the work to further the free java.  Please bare with us
> > > > > as we finalize the development changes necessary to accomplish this
> > > > > task.
> > > >
> > > > Does the new GCC introduce any run-time/ABI breakage which requires
> > > > packages in Fedora Extras Development to be rebuilt? Or does it only
> > > > reveal problematic source code?
> > >
> > > I think all the extras need to be rebuilt for this. I know seahorse
> > > for one needs it (and may need some fixes).
> >
> > AFAIK, seahorse was affected by SONAME changes in some of its
> > dependencies, which made a rebuild necessary. That was a change not
> > related to the GCC upgrade. My question is not about ordinary breakage
> > through upgrades of dependencies.
> 
> Yes, I think that's true but I also think there is some gcc41 rebuild
> issues with it too (well there seems to be when I just try to rebuild
> the srpm. I think the binaries produced by gcc 4 and 4.1 are
> compatible so most things won't need to be rebuilt, but then its
> probably good for them to be rebuilt too.
> 
> Pete
> 
> -- 
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

-- 

Janina Sajka				Phone: +1.240.715.1272
Partner, Capital Accessibility LLC	http://www.CapitalAccessibility.Com

Marketing the Owasys 22C talking screenless cell phone in the U.S. and Canada--Go to http://www.ScreenlessPhone.Com to learn more.

Chair, Accessibility Workgroup		Free Standards Group (FSG)
janina at freestandards.org		http://a11y.org