Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

support hash checks for url reqs with hash fragment #735

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

support hash checks for url reqs with hash fragment #735

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

qwcode
Copy link
Contributor

@qwcode qwcode commented Nov 25, 2012

solution for #468, with unit and functional tests.

this makes pip validate the hash if you did this:
pip install http://domain.com/pkg-1.2.tar.gz#md5=fce076628d299baa2f699ac3475a674c

the complicated part in this was the possibility of using #egg and hash fragments together. I've used #egg fragments in the past when using url tar requirements to give it a definite identity in the dependency resolution process to prevent this problem: #724

Review on Reviewable

@qwcode
Copy link
Contributor Author

qwcode commented Nov 25, 2012

the errors in this are caused by pypa/virtualenv#361

@qwcode
Copy link
Contributor Author

qwcode commented Nov 26, 2012

@dstufft, fyi, if you want to review this, since you opened up #468 on this awhile back.

@d1b
Copy link
Contributor

d1b commented Nov 28, 2012

👍

@d1b
Copy link
Contributor

d1b commented Dec 5, 2012

/me hopes this gets merged soon.

@g2p
Copy link
Contributor

g2p commented Apr 21, 2013

It might be useful to add a flag that enforces this check. This way pip versions that are too old to compute the hash would fail the install (unrecognised flag), and a hash fragment with a syntax typo or a missing hash would also fail the install.

@msabramo
Copy link
Contributor

This looks like a nice enhancement. Maybe it can be revived?

@msabramo
Copy link
Contributor

Sounds sort of like @erikrose's peep. Could be a nice addition to pip.

@xavfernandez
Copy link
Member

@qwcode now that #3231 is merged, this one seems less useful and could be closed ?

@erikrose
Copy link
Contributor

erikrose commented Mar 4, 2016

Yep. It even satisfies #735 (comment).

@dstufft dstufft closed this May 18, 2016
@lock lock bot added the auto-locked Outdated issues that have been locked by automation label Jun 3, 2019
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 3, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
auto-locked Outdated issues that have been locked by automation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants