From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LXlzK-0003Ez-F5 for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:33:02 +0100 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LXlxz-0003UM-Ki for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:31:39 +0000 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:31:39 +0000 Received: from k.kooi by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:31:39 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:31:27 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1234456715-23618-1-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <1234456715-23618-2-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <1234456715-23618-3-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <1234456715-23618-4-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <1234456715-23618-5-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <87prhnmcxh.fsf@neumann.lab.ossystems.com.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090209 Shredder/3.0b2pre In-Reply-To: <87prhnmcxh.fsf@neumann.lab.ossystems.com.br> Sender: news Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] parted: drop versions up to 1.8.8 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 00:33:02 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 13-02-09 00:51, Otavio Salvador wrote: > I think people are suppose to clean the checksums.ini before adding the > missing ones instead of blindly adding all them. Besides, keeping it in > ini just makes it bigger so I'd prefer to drop them and NACK the patches > that add them back. They get added back by the process we recommend, so NACKing patches on that is bogus. And besides, people might have the 'old' stuff in overlays and you can't put checksums.ini in an overlay. regards, Koen