From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [200.17.161.174] (helo=listas.ossystems.com.br) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LY2wL-0004PA-0j for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:39:05 +0100 Received: from internet.ossystems.com.br (201-40-162-47.cable.viacabocom.com.br [201.40.162.47]) by listas.ossystems.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF8724020B for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:37:52 -0200 (BRST) Received: from ossystems.com.br (unknown [10.1.0.243]) by internet.ossystems.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33FF1740C3 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:37:10 -0200 (BRST) Received: by ossystems.com.br (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4A64E610067; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:37:29 -0200 (BRST) From: Otavio Salvador To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Organization: O.S. Systems Ltda. References: <200902131728.08634.openembedded@haerwu.biz> <878woae03q.fsf@neumann.lab.ossystems.com.br> X-URL: http://www.debian.org/~otavio/ X-Attribution: O.S. Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:37:29 -0200 In-Reply-To: (Ihar Hrachyshka's message of "Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:39:39 +0200") Message-ID: <871vu2chee.fsf@neumann.lab.ossystems.com.br> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 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, 13 Feb 2009 18:39:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Ihar Hrachyshka writes: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> Marcin Juszkiewicz writes: >> >> <...> >>> This solution also has one nasty part - now we can keep SRC_URI for >>> multiple versions in common file, but if we switch to storing it in >>> SRC_URI we will have to change that. >>> >>> Other solution proposed on IRC was to keep checksums in extra file in >>> each directory of packages/ subdirectory. I think that it is not best >>> but sounds better then one file. >>> >>> What do you think? Which way we should go? Do you have other ideas? >> <...> >> >> What about having a checksums for _each_ recipe? >> >> foo_1.0.bb >> foo_1.0.md5sum > > This will waste directories and will make tree navigation harder. Well; so let's just create a md5sums directory at OE topdir and add the dirs and files there. -- O T A V I O S A L V A D O R --------------------------------------------- E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br --------------------------------------------- "Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house."