Bug#572571: packages SHOULD ship checksums (a-la dh_md5sums, but better)
- To: 572571@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#572571: packages SHOULD ship checksums (a-la dh_md5sums, but better)
- From: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>
- Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 16:50:21 +0900
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20130505075021.GA27123@plessy.org>
- Reply-to: Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org>, 572571@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <20100305165133.GA4251@yellowpig>
- References: <20100303151752.835b34d3.erikd@mega-nerd.com> <20100303104725.GA18778@celtic.nixsys.be> <slrnhosifd.rmi.trash@kelgar.0x539.de> <4B8EB3B6.4070208@bzed.de> <20100303211921.GA11527@usha.takhisis.invalid> <87tysxt6p3.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <20100304081121.GA19497@usha.takhisis.invalid> <87vddb23lx.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <20100304220045.GA13767@usha.takhisis.invalid> <20100305165133.GA4251@yellowpig>
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:00:45PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> >
> > Currently, packages ships file checksums which are computed at package
> > build time by the means of dh_md5sums (usually), and stored under
> > /var/lib/dpkg/info/*md5sums. Several people find those checksums
> > useful, mostly for file corruption detection a-la CRC.
> >
> > Empirical tests show that the archive coverage is pretty good, most
> > packages seem to ship those checksums.
> >
> > Hence, there is a desire to turn a similar feature into, for start, a
> > SHOULD requirement, meant to become a MUST later on.
Le Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 05:51:33PM +0100, Bill Allombert a écrit :
>
> If we are moving that way, maybe it would make sense for the checksums
> to be generated by dpkg-buildpackage.
Hello everybody,
while working on another package, I came to realise that the Policy does not
describe the md5sums file at all. Would somebody be interested to submit a
patch ?
Have a nice Sunday,
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: