Re: HP-UX (git-2.14.0) Depot File / Source Code Build throws SHA1 Error
- Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2017 14:01:08 +0100
- From: "josephpattara ." <josephpattara@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: HP-UX (git-2.14.0) Depot File / Source Code Build throws SHA1 Error
Your information was very useful.
Firstly, I could see the SHA1 hash was definitely wrong.
-bash-4.3$ echo foo | ./git hash-object --stdin
I attempted to build the code with OPENSSL_SHA1=Yes and the build is
working and I am able to do a git clone from my HP-UX machine. I still
used the adapted source code HPUX connect website.
I am wondering whether the package which was committed to the HPUX
site (http://hpux.connect.org.uk/) did ever worked for any one as it
was the same SHA1 error I was getting when I installed that depot
file. My HPUX architecture is below:
HP-UX hepscott B.11.31 U ia64 2256017764 unlimited-user license
But I can confirm with the adapated source code from HPUX connect and
using the OPENSSL_SHA1=Yes I am able to build a working git locally.
Thanks a lot.
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 03:04:36PM +0100, josephpattara . wrote:
>> Dear HP-UX Git Maintainers,
>> Sending this email as I was trying to use the HP-UX depot file which
>> was recently committed to the
>> I tried to use the depot file and also attempted to build the code
>> from the adapted source code (using native HP-UX compiler as mentioned
>> in Installation Note) from the website.
> I don't know anything about HP-UX, but I can tell you a few things from
> the Git side...
>> But unfortunately both of them failed with an error:
>> Cloning into xxxx...
>> remote: Counting objects: 19813, done.
>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (9124/9124), done.
>> remote: Total 19813 (delta 10340), reused 16358 (delta 8293)
>> Receiving objects: 100% (19813/19813), 6.07 MiB | 9.72 MiB/s, done.
>> fatal: pack is corrupted (SHA1 mismatch)
>> fatal: index-pack failed
> Assuming there's no corruption happening on the network, it looks like
> there's a bug in the SHA-1 routines of your build. One very basic check
> would be to run:
> echo foo | git hash-object --stdin
> which should produce:
> (If it does that's not a guarantee that there aren't problems with more
> complex inputs, but if it produces a different sha1 that's a clear sign
> of a sha1 issue).
>> Looking at the dynamic link I can see the below:
>> _HP_DLDOPTS="-ldd" /usr/bin/git
>> /usr/lib/hpux32/libpthread.so => /usr/lib/hpux32/libpthread.so
>> libpthread.so.1 => /usr/lib/hpux32/libpthread.so.1
>> libz.so => /usr/local/lib/hpux32/libz.so
>> libiconv.so => /usr/local/lib/hpux32/libiconv.so
>> libintl.so => /usr/local/lib/hpux32/libintl.so
>> libc.so.1 => /usr/lib/hpux32/libc.so.1
>> libdl.so.1 => /usr/lib/hpux32/libdl.so.1
>> Until recently we were using the older GIT version for HP-UX 188.8.131.52
>> and I can see the older GIT had a dynamic link for libcrypto.so.
> Git can build against several SHA-1 implementations. In v2.13 and up,
> the default is the collision-detecting version publicized as part of the
> SHAttered attacks earlier this year. We have had a few problems with it
> misbehaving on uncommon platforms or compilers, so it seems a likely
> candidate here.
> You can try building with "make OPENSSL_SHA1=Yes" to use openssl instead
> of the collision-detecting version. You can also try "make BLK_SHA1=Yes"
> if you have trouble building against openssl for whatever reason.
>> The clarification I have is
>> 1. Is the version 2.14.0 from HPUX connect is it really usable (depot
>> file and also the source code)
> That I don't know. I took a peek at the diff between their source and a
> pristine v2.14.0 tarball, and I don't see anything too exotic. So you
> could try the upstream code from:
> but I suspect the problem would still exist.
>> 2. Was it deliberate to remove the openssl linkage from the new GIT or
>> am I really missing any special configure or build flags to enable the
>> libcrypto.so linkage.
> Yes, the default flipped but you can still change it. See above.
>> 3. Is the SHA1 error which I get is it really to do with the missing
>> libcrypto.so or I am on a wrong inference track?
> I think it's likely that you're on the right track.