From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [68.230.241.45] (helo=fed1rmmtao101.cox.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lbr6w-0005if-0g for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 07:49:46 +0100 Received: from fed1rmimpo03.cox.net ([70.169.32.75]) by fed1rmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090224064639.ONLB2948.fed1rmmtao101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 01:46:39 -0500 Received: from localhost ([68.230.63.214]) by fed1rmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id Kimf1b0084dMFYL04imfFh; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 01:46:39 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=_qgFuyByEGCj-mRECM4A:9 a=mTdydqthOHHX8U15m0T_MVJ788kA:4 a=LY0hPdMaydYA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 23:46:39 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org Message-ID: <20090224064639.GE2172@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <200902131728.08634.openembedded@haerwu.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <200902131728.08634.openembedded@haerwu.biz> Organization: Embedded Alley Solutions, Inc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Subject: Re: checksums situation X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 06:49:47 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 05:28:08PM +0100, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: > > Hi > > It is nearly two years since conf/checksums.ini was introduced. We > populated it with over 6000 entries during that time (mostly by > automatic fetching of all source on CELF and EWI machines). But there > are problems with it's format. I'm going to make a different suggestion. Lets just drop it. Part of why I say this is that we went back on it being a mandatory thing because it was a burden. And we're already back to adding stuff without checksums again (gstreamer, libdaemon on this build so far..). And, is anyone doing more then 'cat tmp/checksums.ini >> openembedded/conf/checksums.ini && python the-sorter' ? And by more I mean check for an upstream .md5 or similar, to make sure this is really right? Perhaps we're going about this wrong. Perhaps we want to see if from upstream we can get ${URI}.md5, .md5sum .sha1 or any of the other standard mechanisms and seeing if we get that as a match (and pre-seeding ourselves with just the hashes for the tools that check hashes). Oh, and in the 5 minutes the above took to write, gst-plugins-base failed to have a checksum too. -- Tom Rini