here is a patch for checking both md5 :)

Index: make/depends.xml
===================================================================
--- make/depends.xml    (revision 538045)
+++ make/depends.xml    (working copy)
@@ -368,7 +368,10 @@
            </antcall>
            <checksum file="@{dest}" property="@{dest}.md5" />
            <condition property="@{dest}.md5.verified" value="true">
-                <equals arg1="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" arg2="@{md5}" />
+                <or>
+                    <equals arg1="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" arg2="@{md5}" />
+                    <equals arg1="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" arg2="@{md5}" />
+                </or>
            </condition>
            <antcall target="-remove-file-if-bad">
                <param name="jar" value="@{dest}" />
Index: make/depends.properties
===================================================================
--- make/depends.properties     (revision 538045)
+++ make/depends.properties     (working copy)
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
msvcr.dll.file.x86=msvcr71.dll
msvcr.url.x86=file:///${hyenv.SystemRoot}/system32/msvcr71.dll
msvcr.md5.x86=86f1895ae8c5e8b17d99ece768a70732
+msvcr.md5.alternative=ca2f560921b7b8be1cf555a5a18d54c3

msvcr.dir.x86_64=${depends.dir}/libs/windows.x86_64
msvcr.dll.x86_64=${msvcr.dir.x86_64}/msvcr80.dll




On 5/15/07, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been running into the following problem with the msvcr71.dll
that's copied from my windows/system32.

File depends/libs/windows.x86/msvcr71.dll has incorrect md5 checksum.  Expected:

 86f1895ae8c5e8b17d99ece768a70732
found:
 ca2f560921b7b8be1cf555a5a18d54c3

I thought perhaps it was just a problem on one of my servers, but I've
run into this on multiple machines. What I've found is that there's a
VS2003 service pack (SP1) that were installed on my servers when I
recently installed VS2003, which seems to change the msvcr71.dll in at
least a minor way; enough to change the md5 sum.

Would anyone object to updating the build files to use this new
checksum and changing the build instructions to use VS2003 SP1?

Another option would be to check both hashes and allow if one is fine.

-Nathan



--
Tony Wu
China Software Development Lab, IBM

Reply via email to