[Buildroot] [PATCH] [RFC] U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches

[Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>]

Arnout, Julien, All,

On 2016-04-20 22:18 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly:
> On 04/20/16 10:47, Julien Boibessot wrote:
> >On 19/04/2016 01:18, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> >>On 04/18/16 12:28, Julien Boibessot wrote:
> >>>Hello,
> >>>
> >>>Arnout,
> >>>
> >>>thanks for the comments.
> >>>
> >>>On 14/04/2016 23:25, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> >>[snip]
> >>>>
> >>>>   Oh, and something similar should be done for LINUX_PATCH as well.
> >>>
> >>>LINUX_PATCH is already working well with external patches that have to
> >>>be downloaded.
> >>
> >>  Of course, because we don't have a linux.hash and probably never will
> >>have one.
> >
> >ah ok, got it now ! :-)
> >So why can't we just get rid of uboot.hash too ?
> 
>  I don't think so.

Siding with Arnout on that one: we want to one day make .hash files
mandatory.

>  For the kernel, it is very unlikely that you just use the latest version,
> most projects will want a specific version and usually even a patched
> version. With device trees this becomes somewhat less true, but even so,
> most people just don't use the latest-and-greatest kernel. Therefore, having
> hashes is quite useless.

Yes and no. We could well have hashes for the latest release, at least.
Then, when bumping, we can leave the old one and just add the new one;
thus hashes would be piling up as time goes, at least for official
releases.

Plus, we could also bulk-add hashes for older official releases. Official
releases are also very often used, at least for "standard" architectures
like x86, so it would not be nonsense to have hashes for those releases.

Normally, when a .hash file does exist, an archive must have at least
one hash, otherwise this is considered an error. NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR makes
it so that this is not an error that an archive does not have a hash,
but won't bar the existing hashes to be checked.

It's on my TODO to add hashes for the kernel.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

>  For u-boot (and barebox for that matter), this also used to be the case,
> but nowadays you can very often get away with just using the upstream
> version. In this case, the hash is indeed valuable.
> 
>  Cc-ing Yann, our hash expert :-)
> 
>  Regards,
>  Arnout
> 
> 
> -- 
> Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
> Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
> Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
> G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
> LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
> GPG fingerprint:  7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'