On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:15:51PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > It looks like you have not read all the thread, other's have made some
> > good points as to why it's good. Just in case I'm going to voice my opinion
> > here again and see if I can convicen you (and other's listening) :)
> Which nearly all can be satisfied by generating the md5sum on install.
Sure, show us the code or do something to make the available code flow
into dpkg. The code for doing that via debhelper + debsums is already
there.
It is even already "wasting" mirror bandwidth and disk usage since the
percentage of packages without md5sums is quite low (seem Romain's
figures).
The current situation can only be described as "some buggy packages
which need to be fixed". Better solutions can of course be found, but
they all seem, to me, more far away from the goal which can be obtained
fixing the buggy package.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature