[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: sha1 support
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: sha1 support |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Jan 2004 16:01:35 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Colin Walters <address@hidden>
> > Because it's not too hard to do and spares users of 1.2pre0 (and
> > 1.2pre1 as soon as the list is back up) from a continuity error while
> > tracking the head or maintaining their own archives.
> We can assure an easier transition by releasing a tla 1.2pre2 which
> contains the newer parser, but doesn't generate sha1 sums. This is
> incredibly easy to do: just wrap #if 0 around the part that does
> safe_write ("sha1 ...);.
> Then the final tla 1.2 will do the generation. And we all only convert
> our archives once tla 1.2 is out for real.
That's true but it will only reduce, (probably) not eliminate those
effected by the discontinuity.
Is there a rush for sha1 stuff? Is there some reason why buffering
the checksums before writing the file is a bad idea?
Very often, on #arch at least, people are told to use head or the
latest preX release because, in spite of the names, they have proven
to be stable and reliable over a long time period. Why undermine
that?
-t
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: sha1 support, Neil Stevens, 2004/01/20