Closed jmccdev closed 6 months ago
That should actually be caught by a full verification the chain file. Currently the completeness of ASC MHL files and their consistency (hashes) are not verified against the chain file. That's a TBD.
There is already an issue #22 for the verification of chain files.
Fixed in v1.0 (see https://github.com/ascmitc/mhl/releases/tag/v1.0 for details)
The data used for this is under
/sources/106_chain_file/106a/
and/sources/106_chain_file/106b/
within the dataset on the G-Drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PrAPczRFBQsVfjakbX-fqnDVHsAD-kd1For
106a
, the newest MHL file,0002_16421225_Day001_2022-02-09_045418.mhl
, was manually deleted. I ran thecreate
command on the same root directory afterward:$ ascmhl create -h md5 16421225_Day001/
There is no error message printed about the missing 0002 MHL. A new 0002 MHL is created and appended to the chain file.
For
106b
, the oldest MHL file,0001_16421225_Day001_2022-02-09_045325.mhl
, was manually deleted. I ran thecreate
command on the same root directory afterward:$ ascmhl create -h md5 16421225_Day001/
There is no error message printed about the missing 0001* MHL. It remains referenced in the chain file.