Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Clear questions and runnable code
get the best and fastest answer
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Digest::SHA gives different values for unix/windows

by rmahin (Beadle)
on Jun 12, 2013 at 06:02 UTC ( #1038393=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Digest::SHA gives different values for unix/windows
in thread Digest::SHA gives different values for unix/windows

Well that would explain why they are different using ftp. However, in the perl scripts I wrote, I explicitly set the the socket to binmode on both client and server side. Is there something else I should be doing in addition to this? This is the part I'm particularly interested in as I only used ftp to see if something in my code was messing it up.

Thanks for the response!


Comment on Re^2: Digest::SHA gives different values for unix/windows
Re^3: Digest::SHA gives different values for unix/windows
by Jim (Curate) on Jun 12, 2013 at 17:30 UTC

    Have you used another utility to compute the SHA-256 or MD5 digests of the binary files on both ends of the file transfer? It's not clear to me yet if your problem is that the files are not the same, and so something's wrong with the file transfer, or that the files are the same, and so something's wrong with your digest computation. Unequivocally prove the difference or sameness of the files first, then you'll know with certainty which of two different problems you must solve.

    (I like md5deep for Microsoft Windows.)

      Alright so tested it using sha256deep64.exe for windows, and sha256sum for linux. Saw the same results using the perl script. Would appear the problem is with my file transferring.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1038393]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (16)
As of 2014-07-28 16:23 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (204 votes), past polls