<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "http://bugs.gentoo.org/bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="2.22.7"
          urlbase="http://bugs.gentoo.org/"
          maintainer="bugzilla@gentoo.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>105169</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2005-09-07 11:21 0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>ancient package emul-linux-x86-baselibs-2.2.tar.bz2 have a bad digest now</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2005-09-07 17:08:56 0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>Gentoo Linux</product>
          <component>Unspecified</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>AMD64</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Linux</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>minor</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter>didier@famille-link.fr</reporter>
          <assigned_to>amd64@gentoo.org</assigned_to>
          

      

      
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>didier@famille-link.fr</who>
            <bug_when>2005-09-07 11:21:51 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Just have this error with update in ~amd64 :

&gt;&gt;&gt; md5 files   ;-) files/digest-emul-linux-x86-baselibs-2.2

!!! Digest verification Failed:
!!!    /usr/portage/distfiles/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-2.2.tar.bz2
!!! Reason: Filesize does not match recorded size

this package was downloaded the 30th of july and have a size of 7632859.

I&apos;ve just delete this one and the freshly downloaded have a size of 4553414 !

If you have revised the package between july and september why do not completely
change the version number ?? For me it&apos;s a mistake in the release process of a
gentoo package.

Thanks for comments.



Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>herbs@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2005-09-07 17:08:56 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>*sigh* Yes, a 2.2 release was made in July and removed after a very short period
(2 days) as it proved too buggy. To be honest I had completely forgotten that we
had made this release when I made the new 2.2 release :-( I&apos;ve now renamed this
to 2.3 to avoid any conflict. My appologies to anyone that has had to
download/install it twice.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
      
    </bug>

</bugzilla>