Colin Watson <email@example.com> (2016-03-16): > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Pretty sure this breaks (will break, when the change is propagated outside > > experimental) d-i as it stands, due to the check on all 3 checksums in > > net-retriever. > > Looking at the code, I don't think that's true. It skips checksums that > are missing from Release, and it stops after the first checksum that it > successfully finds. Unless I'm looking at the wrong bit of > net-retriever? It's entirely possible I was thinking of an earlier version/approach, different from what got implemented in net-retriever finally after the last archive-side change. Apologies for any induced headscratching. KiBi.
Description: Digital signature