-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
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
How to calculate the hash of my package directly? #17865
Comments
There are two ways to do this:
Also, it's recommended to ask questions in one of the Zig communities (https://github.com/ziglang/zig/wiki/Community) rather than on the issue tracker. |
Would you select one of them? It's too many and the last time I go through them, it doesn't seem they are active. |
Thank you! I ever used
so this helps. |
Ziggit gets a decent amount of attention. Personally, I'm also active on the Zig Programming Language Discord, but I'm wary of trying to steer everyone into a proprietary chat platform we can't control. Ultimately, I think it's up to which platforms you feel most comfortable using; if enough other people feel the same way, then a community will naturally grow out of that. |
It doesn't seem that |
If you're using 0.11, it isn't there; it was added recently in #17363 and is available on master. |
@ianprime0509 Thank you! However, I realize that these two methods still calculate the hash after the release is made. It implies to me that it's the downstream's responsibility to verify the files and specify the hash - is it correct? |
Well. According to #17363, I may fetch a local package so the hash is calculated also. |
I built a package for uuid.
For using it in a downstream project, I can specify the dependency:
However, the
hash
part is tricky - as a package owner, I don't know how to calculate it directly, but now I put any valid hash value (not even just "") to thehash
field and letzig
tells me what's true.It can be less than awesome but if I can do it directly and thus share the hash during the release instead of after the release and hotfix the release note.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: