From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 24 06:50:14 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86E0016A423 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:50:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476F543D6E for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:50:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jAO6o9oO001827 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:50:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id jAO6o9NZ001826; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:50:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:50:09 GMT Message-Id: <200511240650.jAO6o9NZ001826@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Ed Schouten Cc: Subject: Re: ports/89466: SHA256 sums for 'accessibility/' and 'shells/' X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ed Schouten List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:50:14 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/89466; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Ed Schouten To: Pav Lucistnik Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/89466: SHA256 sums for 'accessibility/' and 'shells/' Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:31:27 +0100 --65fUfJaAyj3QT6Mb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, * Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > I was totally bored this evening, so I decided to do some SHA256 > > checksumming on the 'accesibility/' and 'shells/' categories. Why those? > > Don't ask me ;-) >=20 > I assume you also obtained approvals from all affected maintainers? Well, getting all maintainers' approval would be quite hard to accomplish. Would such a minor update require the maintainer's approval? > > I ran a `make checksum` afterwards and all MD5 and SHA256 sums were > > okay. >=20 > No they weren't. If you first created new sums then validated them, how > could you possible detect changes? When I finished adding the sums to the tree, I moved my distfiles directory out of the way and ran the `make checksum`, thus forcing Ports to refetch and check. > > http://g-rave.nl/files/ports/accessibility-sha256.diff > > http://g-rave.nl/files/ports/shells-sha256.diff >=20 > That website is dead. Sorry about that - one of the maintainers of that machine did something silly. Yours, --=20 Ed Schouten WWW: http://g-rave.nl/ --65fUfJaAyj3QT6Mb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDhPvPmVI4SHXwmhERAp05AJ4/A99dnBy28nocFCvu3qLZezBCEwCfc+2W 3+jNZ7TrqfkKBRG47SF4z9U= =MibR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --65fUfJaAyj3QT6Mb--