Bug 159553 - md5sum or other hash for installed LO (on disc or ssd)
Summary: md5sum or other hash for installed LO (on disc or ssd)
Status: RESOLVED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: LibreOffice (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
Inherited From OOo
Hardware: All All
: medium normal
Assignee: Not Assigned
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: Installer
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2024-02-04 16:23 UTC by jedamus
Modified: 2024-02-05 10:06 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description jedamus 2024-02-04 16:23:20 UTC
As a feature, I want a md5sum or other hash to run on an installed LO to check the integrity on disc/ssd. So I can see the consistency of LO. Sometimes you run into Hardware-errors (bad block on disc for example), so the system is in bad shape. A check running on all files LO consists of will show you any abnormalities on disc.
Comment 1 V Stuart Foote 2024-02-04 19:41:16 UTC
Why? Instead simply perform the hash check against the downloaded installer. 

I.e. for the TDF provided builds package HASH in MD5, SHA1, SHA256 are available from the MirrorBrain driven project archives at:

https://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/

Select the Metadata "Details" page for each, corresponding to the install you've done.

With similar HASH values for the installer packaging for other distro provided repros. 

Otherwise, see little reason for project to perform integrity checking on an installed instance of LibreOffice. Not clear how the mechanics of that could even work given the distributed build architecture across the community.
Comment 2 jedamus 2024-02-05 05:43:10 UTC
Hi!

What would you do, if you have a bad block on disc, so that your LO does not behave as expected (but does not crash)? I think a hash would protect you against that. In our mailing list we detected that problem for one user. And I think, he is not the only one.

You are right, when you say, that there is a difference between operating systems. So you have to run the hash for every file depending on OS. But you could use a shell script (at least for *nix systems) to iterate over the LO installation.
Comment 3 Julien Nabet 2024-02-05 10:02:12 UTC
(In reply to jedamus from comment #2)
> Hi!
> 
> What would you do, if you have a bad block on disc, so that your LO does not
> behave as expected (but does not crash)? I think a hash would protect you
> against that. In our mailing list we detected that problem for one user. And
> I think, he is not the only one.
> 
> You are right, when you say, that there is a difference between operating
> systems. So you have to run the hash for every file depending on OS. But you
> could use a shell script (at least for *nix systems) to iterate over the LO
> installation.

You may tell the same for any software then.
IMHO, it's not the role of LO to check this but rather the OS or a specific application.
Now we may also tell there could be some bad sectors after some time for this specific application or the OS so they couldn't make the right job.

In conclusion, I'd say NOTABUG here (nor a valid request of enhancement).
Comment 4 jedamus 2024-02-05 10:04:14 UTC
I see. Thank you.