[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debsums priority standard?

In article <m0xSMxW-0004nNC@chiark.greenend.org.uk> you wrote:
: Christoph writes:
: > I got a suggestion to make the debsums package priority standard. Both
: > debmake and debhelper produce packages with md5sums. Some maintainers
: > also have manually equipped their packages with md5sums. The debsums
: > package includes scripts to check the integrity of packages installed
: > with md5sums and is quite small.

: 1. There is not yet a consensus about what the correct goals and
: mechanisms for these checksums are.

: 2. I would object to any package-building tool written by Christoph
: being made Standard without a thorough design and code review

debsums is no package building tool. Maybe you should review the issues
before posting?

And why in the world are you unable to finally come up with a release of
dpkg that includes the checksums? You first said that you would do such a
thing about one year ago.

I only released the stuff when I got the
impression that you abandoned the issue. Sometimes I think you are
abandoning the project or even worse trying to sabotage it. There is a
huge list of things that are not done because they are in your ballpark
and no one else is daring to make the necessary changes.

I have the impression that there is a dysfunctional relationship between
debian and you.

--- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
Please always CC me when replying to posts on mailing lists

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . Trouble? 
e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: