From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 20 23:20:42 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E03016A419 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:20:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcus@blazingdot.com) Received: from marklar.blazingdot.com (marklar.blazingdot.com [207.154.84.83]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0551B13C45A for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:20:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcus@blazingdot.com) Received: (qmail 9570 invoked by uid 503); 20 Sep 2007 23:20:41 -0000 Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:20:41 -0700 From: Marcus Reid To: Boris Samorodov Message-ID: <20070920232041.GA8549@blazingdot.com> References: <20070920184201.GA72805@kobe.laptop> <20070920184606.GA73060@kobe.laptop> <20070920223015.GA88368@blazingdot.com> <20070920224336.GA94445@blazingdot.com> <30854022@srv.sem.ipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <30854022@srv.sem.ipt.ru> X-Coffee-Level: nearly-fatal User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Giorgos Keramidas , Colin Percival Subject: Re: portsnap snapshot corruption? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:20:42 -0000 On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 02:56:57AM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote: > On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:43:36 -0700 Marcus Reid wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 03:30:15PM -0700, Marcus Reid wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 09:46:06PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > > On 2007-09-20 21:42, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Is something wrong with the portsnap servers, or should I try to see if > > > > > there's something odd with my latest CURRENT upgrade? > > > > > > > > Damn, right after having spent an hour on this *and* posting a message, > > > > our local admin notified us that our network has started using a > > > > transparent proxy -- which is apparently broken. > > > > > > > > Sorry for the noise. I'll try to resolve this with our IT guys :) > > > > > > I've been having the same problem and I'm not behind any sort of proxy. > > > Also, what sort of proxy would corrupt that 49MB gzipped tar file in a > > > way that it passes gunzip -t? I think this is a real problem with > > > the snapshots being served up by the portsnap servers. I posted this > > > issue to freebsd-ports@ yesterday. > > > I should provide a couple more details of what I've seen: > > > - The portsnap fetch downloads the 49MB .tgz, and it extracts > > properly. This file is not corrupted (passes gzip checksum). > > > - In the portsnap/snap directory, many of the .gz > > files are correct, but many (looks like 1/4?) of them are > > truncated somehow. They are gzip files, but they are corrupted. > > Isn't it related to a recent libarchive backout?: > . src/lib/libarchive/archive_write_disk.c rev.1.16 > . src/lib/libarchive/test/test_write_disk.c rev.1.5 Yes, that would be it. Both of the machines that I was testing on have the version with the regressions. Thanks! Marcus