Home | Docs | Forums | Lists | Bugs | Planet | Store | GMN | Get Gentoo!
Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.
View Bug Activity | Format For Printing | XML | Clone This Bug
I enter the command : emerge -S perldoc and get the following error : Searching... /!!! Digest verification failed: !!! /usr/portage/net-p2p/deluge/deluge-0.5.6.2.ebuild !!! Reason: Failed on MD5 verification !!! Got: 9ba529dba97a2f3ff7f5897c60f8da05 !!! Expected: d8872203d4bcaade87029b94ca4631a4 [ Results for search key : perldoc ] [ Applications found : 0 ] The first time i see that, i deleted the directory in portage rm -rf /usr/portage/net-p2p/deluge and do again a emerge --sync. Then i enter again emerge -S perldoc and got the same error. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.emerge --sync 2.emerge -S perldoc 3. Actual Results: Failed on MD5 verification Expected Results: Correct the ebuild or the checksum
This is the beginning of the output of emerge --sync emerge --sync >>> Starting rsync with rsync://64.127.121.98/gentoo-portage... >>> Checking server timestamp ... Welcome to owl.gentoo.org Server Address : 64.127.121.98 Contact Name : mirror-admin@gentoo.org Hardware : 4 x Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.40GHz, 1024MB RAM Please note: common gentoo-netiquette says you should not sync more than once a day. Users who abuse the rsync.gentoo.org rotation may be added to a temporary ban list. MOTD brought to you by motd-o-matic, version 0.3 receiving file list ... done timestamp.chk Number of files: 1 Number of files transferred: 1 Total file size: 32 bytes Total transferred file size: 32 bytes Literal data: 32 bytes Matched data: 0 bytes File list size: 32 File list generation time: 0.001 seconds File list transfer time: 0.000 seconds Total bytes sent: 227 Total bytes received: 543 sent 227 bytes received 543 bytes 220.00 bytes/sec total size is 32 speedup is 0.04 Welcome to owl.gentoo.org Server Address : 64.127.121.98 Contact Name : mirror-admin@gentoo.org Hardware : 4 x Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.40GHz, 1024MB RAM
Fixed, thanks.
*** Bug 201531 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
It is working correctly now. Thanks. I am impressed by your responsiveness!
