Skip to content

fix: prevent intermittent digest-mismatch errors during archive updates#296

Open
gruyaume wants to merge 1 commit into
canonical:mainfrom
gruyaume:dev-fixhash
Open

fix: prevent intermittent digest-mismatch errors during archive updates#296
gruyaume wants to merge 1 commit into
canonical:mainfrom
gruyaume:dev-fixhash

Conversation

@gruyaume
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@gruyaume gruyaume commented May 15, 2026

Chisel intermittently fails with expected digest X, got Y when Ubuntu's archive is mid-publication and InRelease is temporarily inconsistent with Packages.gz at the named path (a window we observed lasting at least 39 minutes against the same publication in real CI runs for Ella Core). Fetch the package index by content hash using apt's Acquire-By-Hash , which Ubuntu archives have advertised since 16.04 (2016), so the URL itself encodes the expected bytes; falls back to the named path when an archive doesn't advertise the feature or a specific hash has been garbage-collected.

Fixes #295

Reference


  • Have you signed the CLA?

Signed-off-by: Guillaume Belanger <guillaume.belanger27@gmail.com>
@lczyk lczyk added the Bug An undesired feature ;-) label May 29, 2026
@upils
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

upils commented Jun 1, 2026

Hey @gruyaume, thanks for your PR! Is this ready for review?

@gruyaume
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

gruyaume commented Jun 1, 2026

Hey @gruyaume, thanks for your PR! Is this ready for review?

Yes.

If you find the code changes mostly up to you standards, I am happy to address minor issues. However if there are major issues and you have a completely different idea of the solution, please go ahead and implement it your way. I only want the issue fixed as soon as possible, I don't care about getting the attribution.

@gruyaume gruyaume marked this pull request as ready for review June 1, 2026 13:10
@upils
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

upils commented Jun 1, 2026

Yes.

If you find the code changes mostly up to you standards, I am happy to address minor issues. However if there are major issues and you have a completely different idea of the solution, please go ahead and implement it your way. I only want the issue fixed as soon as possible, I don't care about getting the attribution.

Thanks! I explored another approach in parallel but I ended up circling back to yours so there is no point just having another PR for the sake of it. I will review yours then, because I expect only minor changes will be requested.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Bug An undesired feature ;-)

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Chisel is flaky when the archive is updating

3 participants