From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [74.125.92.149] (helo=qw-out-1920.google.com) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LcqVo-000336-BZ for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 01:23:32 +0100 Received: by qw-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 5so776672qwf.36 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:20:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:received:from:to:cc :subject:organization:references:user-agent:x-url:x-attribution:date :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-type; bh=jvYaDKuyLp7AFjZCLKfqIOPKJO0WzR7jj1IAF0nP3Lk=; b=xY8XAbm21OvacepVblu3Cx5cmNdv/0hS859C3R3ag35xG1P3HuAq/4RQjlKbq/nENQ b/t4wjeWTJF0r4odLcbOdA0R8Zh6E7KrqzdBu6xjSF0mG1/+ajk4M006wcnGB9lYcuQO D3g2b1ouuXsNIuM9X/Zh0d3z9HnXWPhmm9lPE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:organization:references:user-agent:x-url :x-attribution:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-type; b=r5oylSUsc+uxHnZNGaZkW95l21QMbzWwoYPOcu6r2aMzIup9lROk5EPp7bzj4z1JeA e/Crj6aq7mMuAxuR1ohlZJ3e0S1h3FnZjDaQZR5FibPzmtLcs6Wdw73bNTSzMxZxDQCm njnH4Hq3zpoul/gIn1sbEuAbo/N18crc5w/yw= Received: by 10.224.89.74 with SMTP id d10mr3224444qam.202.1235694009541; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:20:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ossystems.com.br (201-40-162-47.cable.viacabocom.com.br [201.40.162.47]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm88424qwf.50.2009.02.26.16.20.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:20:08 -0800 (PST) Sender: Otavio Salvador Received: by ossystems.com.br (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E190A61010D; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:20:04 -0300 (BRT) From: Otavio Salvador To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Organization: O.S. Systems Ltda. References: <200902131728.08634.openembedded@haerwu.biz> <20090224064639.GE2172@smtp.west.cox.net> <1235492001.27962.60.camel@andromeda> <49A4203E.3060202@balister.org> <59251.AFRWVFwAXS0=.1235513405.squirrel@webmail.no-log.org> <1235514594.4890.525.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> <1235552980.5399.10.camel@dax.rpnet.com> <20090225230412.GA25783@denix.org> <1235654920.6336.33.camel@dax.rpnet.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.90 (gnu/linux) (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-URL: http://www.ossystems.com.br/ X-Attribution: O.S. Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:20:04 -0300 In-Reply-To: <1235654920.6336.33.camel@dax.rpnet.com> (Richard Purdie's message of "Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:28:40 +0000") Message-ID: <871vtkvih7.fsf@neumann.lab.ossystems.com.br> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org 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: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:23:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Richard Purdie writes: [...] > For checksum.ini I'm proposing we'd go through BBPATH and append all the > checksum.ini files found together to form one large complete version. > People's overlay/collections can then supplement the checksum data > easily. There certainly isn't a technical reason I can see why this > wouldn't work. I fully agree that this is technically possible and even a desired feature if we stay with a checksums.ini file however I fail to see how it could help to solve the total mess we have in current checksums.ini commits. Even worse is the lack of a policy to add/change items there. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br