From: Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: Official policy to list checksums
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:43:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100125084340.GA18489@denix.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <hjjk5q$rmc$1@ger.gmane.org>
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 09:19:07AM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >> * it has no tools to autogenerate it
> >
> > Give me few minutes - I'll send something to address this point.
Do you have any feedback on the patch I sent? Does it make things any better?
> >> * has not been agreed on in any way.
> >
> > Actually, specifying checksums in corresponding recipes was agreed on during
> > the OEDEM in November. Using additional variable flags in base.bbclass was
> > added by Phil, since bitbake cannot handle SHA256 sums in SRC_URI. Although,
> > Richard mentioned he'd like to get it implemented in bitbake at some point:
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.bitbake.devel/1089/focus=1115
>
> Ah yes, stuff agreed at OEDEM, I see. I also remember that nearly
> everything that was 'agreed' there got dis-agreed on the mailinglist here.
> And I also remember that I said that to be consistent sane-srcrevs
> should cease to exist as well :)
This way we won't get anywhere... :) I thought (maybe I'm wrong) everybody
agrees at least with the fact that central checksums.ini is not the best
approach. Keeping checksums in the metadata inside SRC_URI seemed like a
viable solution. Are there any fundamental flaws with this method, besides
lacking some tools?
BTW, I agree with you on the sane-srcrevs topic, if it's any consolation... :)
--
Denys
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-25 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-23 20:06 Official policy to list checksums Paul Menzel
2010-01-24 7:06 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2010-01-24 10:29 ` Koen Kooi
2010-01-24 11:08 ` Frans Meulenbroeks
2010-01-24 11:13 ` Koen Kooi
2010-01-24 11:25 ` Paul Menzel
2010-01-25 1:56 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2010-01-25 1:59 ` [PATCH 0/2] simplify switch to new SRC_URI-based checksums Denys Dmytriyenko
2010-01-25 1:59 ` [PATCH 1/2] base.bbclass: pre-create SRC_URI checksums to include in the recipe Denys Dmytriyenko
2010-01-25 7:17 ` Khem Raj
2010-01-25 7:19 ` Frans Meulenbroeks
2010-01-25 1:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] base.bbclass: don't pre-generate checksums.ini entries any longer Denys Dmytriyenko
2010-01-25 7:18 ` Khem Raj
2010-01-25 7:24 ` Frans Meulenbroeks
2010-01-25 8:00 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2010-01-25 7:24 ` Official policy to list checksums Khem Raj
2010-01-25 8:19 ` Koen Kooi
2010-01-25 8:43 ` Denys Dmytriyenko [this message]
2010-01-25 8:52 ` Graeme Gregory
2010-01-27 22:09 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2010-02-21 10:37 ` Frans Meulenbroeks
2010-01-25 9:55 ` Koen Kooi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100125084340.GA18489@denix.org \
--to=denis@denix.org \
--cc=openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.