md5sums files (was Re: over 30000 bugs in our archive (!))
- To: Christian Schwarz <schwarz@monet.m.isar.de>
- Cc: debian-policy@lists.debian.org
- Subject: md5sums files (was Re: over 30000 bugs in our archive (!))
- From: Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>
- Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 11:47:25 -0800
- Message-id: <[🔎] 19980209114725.35296@kite>
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980209130106.17554B-100000@monet>; from Christian Schwarz on Mon, Feb 09, 1998 at 01:02:43PM +0100
- References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980209113537.17323A-100000@monet> <Pine.LNX.3.96.980209130106.17554B-100000@monet>
More problems I'm seeing as a view the lintian output -
The lack of an md5sums file is flagged as an error. However, I'm not aware
of any policy that says we need one. I personally like the md5sums files,
but I thought lintian was bound by policy, so why is it reporting this as a
bug?
Also, lintian files it as a bug if a conffile is not listed in the md5sums
file. Debhelper's dh_md5sums program, which makes md5sum files, excludes
conffiles from md5sum files on purpose, becuase that info is duplicated
elsewhere. So every debhelper package with a conffile gets a linitan error
message.
We need to get a consensus on whether
1. md5sum files should be required by policy.
2. conffiles should be included in them.
(Moving this to debian-policy.)
--
see shy jo
Reply to: