Page 1 of 1

nvm install --lts: checksums don't match

Posted: 27. Apr 2020, 18:22
by Peppy
Host: Microsoft Surface, Windows 10
VirtualBox version: 6.1
Guest OS: Ubuntu 18.04
Guest Additions installed: yes (that is, I think so)

Used for comparison:
1. Ubuntu 16.04 running in a WSL instance on the same host PC.
2. Ubuntu 18.04 running native on a second PC.

I'm trying to install a piece of software on an Ubuntu 18.04 VM, and I keep getting a "Checksums don't match" error message. I only get the error message in the VM, not on a WSL instance on the same hardware, and not on native Ubuntu 18.04 on a different PC. I wonder if there's a setting in my VM parameters that I need to change?

The software is Node. It's installed using NVM. The NVM installation goes without a hitch, and

Code: Select all

nvm --version
gives the right version number. The error happens when I try to install node, using either

Code: Select all

nvm install node
or

Code: Select all

nvm install --lts
. (You don't need to know NVM or Node to help me with this issue. Keep reading.) From the terminal output, it looks like the problem is in either copying the archive to the VM, or extracting the bits from the archive.

Here's the NVM output:

Code: Select all

$ nvm install --lts
Installing latest LTS version.
Downloading and installing node v12.16.2...
Local cache found: ${NVM_DIR}/.cache/bin/node-v12.16.2-linux-x64/node-v12.16.2-linux-x64.tar.xz
Computing checksum with sha256sum
Checksums do not match: 'fa73d939d44e68cb27f475070cc3adb7b83cc5c242abd4cd35e800f24fedcbdd' found, 'f94a6eb06e80ef2794ebf51a2baed0b89ed307d3196ab5579f16c0fa7cc62901' expected.
Checksum check failed!
Removing the broken local cache...
Downloading (stuff deleted bcuz the forum SW won't let me post it)
################################################################################################# 100.0%
Computing checksum with sha256sum
Checksums do not match: '4751b88a4dbe8bdc0349c298b6ef88576185fe69fdf2687da71de01cd35219a2' found, 'f94a6eb06e80ef2794ebf51a2baed0b89ed307d3196ab5579f16c0fa7cc62901' expected.
xz: (stdin): Compressed data is corrupt
tar: Unexpected EOF in archive
tar: Unexpected EOF in archive
tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now
Binary download failed, trying source.
Local cache found: ${NVM_DIR}/.cache/src/node-v12.16.2/node-v12.16.2.tar.xz
Computing checksum with sha256sum
Checksums do not match: '4e4179f69fd415050d6e91709c94f76e993d50e2ce418943df2b1624a8f22c98' found, '555c47ca0a40e5526d9ab7b2e9c18f9dbd1d956cbdc013fd2223bb11a069be78' expected.
Checksum check failed!
Removing the broken local cache...
Downloading (stuff deleted bcuz the forum SW won't let me post it)
################################################################################################# 100.0%
Computing checksum with sha256sum
Checksums do not match: '4fd3917e99b2f1b2588a719ed9d4eb36ba647c00f1e23ece9cb8a68b2a755255' found, '555c47ca0a40e5526d9ab7b2e9c18f9dbd1d956cbdc013fd2223bb11a069be78' expected.
xz: (stdin): Compressed data is corrupt
tar: Unexpected EOF in archive
tar: Unexpected EOF in archive
tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now
nvm: install v12.16.2 failed!
Here's what it should look like:

Code: Select all

Installing latest LTS version.
Downloading and installing node v12.16.2...
Downloading (stuff deleted bcuz the forum SW won't let me post it)
######################################################################## 100.0%
Computing checksum with sha256sum
Checksums matched!
Creating default alias: default -> lts/* (-> v12.16.2)
... because that's what it looked like in WSL Ubuntu 16.04 on the same computer, and native Ubuntu 8.04 on the other computer.

So is there a parameter or a setting on my VM that I need to change to fix it?

Re: nvm install --lts: checksums don't match

Posted: 27. Apr 2020, 18:44
by scottgus1
There is no parameter to change how hashes run inside a guest, but there have been some reports of the data on a good ISO failing to be read correctly for a guest install, or guest updates not running correctly, possibly due to hashes not being made correctly.

Can you please uninstall Virtualbox, and the Extension Pack if you have it, and install 6.1.2? See if you can install correctly. If not, go back to 6.1.0 or 6.0.14. If 6.1.2 is good, please then upgrade to 6.1.4 and try a new install in a new guest.

Re: nvm install --lts: checksums don't match

Posted: 27. Apr 2020, 20:35
by mpack
scottgus1 wrote:there have been some reports of the data on a good ISO failing to be read correctly for a guest install
I've seen you mention this a couple of times Scott. Do you have a reference, ideally from a reliable source?

As a first resort we need to know what the checksum covers. And a link to the exact ISO! Definitely need to see that before I could concede any notion of a bug.

The reason for my scepticism: I can't imagine why the devs would be messing with the optical drivers in this day and age, or why it would only affect some people if they did.

In the past we've had similar reports but they concerned non-compliant (with the standard) ISO files. I.e. technically their length should be a multiple of 2048, which is one CD/DVD sector. VirtualBox was slightly more relaxed, it would accept any multiple of 512 - I don't know if they still allow that.

Re: nvm install --lts: checksums don't match

Posted: 27. Apr 2020, 21:04
by scottgus1
To be honest with you, Don, like a nitwit I didn't keep links to the forum posts from the beginning... :oops:

I'll try to go back and find them. In my perception it's been happening since after 6.1.2 came out, posters having hash issues or bad files on ISO installs and Linux apt-gets, where the same ISO (is claimed to) work on other PCs. Just an inkling, I'm probably wrong.

Re: nvm install --lts: checksums don't match

Posted: 28. Apr 2020, 14:32
by Peppy
I got sidetracked by this little issue ...

Re: nvm install --lts: checksums don't match [SOLVED]

Posted: 28. Apr 2020, 18:53
by Peppy
Short summary of the solution: Some Windows 10 components were getting in the way of VirtualBox.

Changing the configuration of those Windows 10 components fixed the problem. See viewtopic.php?f=6&t=97919 for details.

Thanks for your assistance.