From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 9 18:24:10 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1DB116A41F for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:24:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C19AD43D6B for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 18:24:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A08D21A3C24 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 10:24:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B9B2751501; Wed, 9 Nov 2005 13:24:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 13:24:05 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20051109182405.GB27053@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20051109165951.GA75924@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <20051109170437.GW28443@droso.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="yNb1oOkm5a9FJOVX" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051109170437.GW28443@droso.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Subject: Re: SHA256 checksums X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 18:24:11 -0000 --yNb1oOkm5a9FJOVX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 06:04:37PM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 06:59:51PM +0200, Vasil Dimov wrote: > > Should maintainers explicitly submit PRs with the SHA256 checksums... > > seems quite tedious. >=20 > Quite so. > >=20 > > Is there going to be some automatic and massive SHA256 checksum > > gather and commit stuff? >=20 > This is what happened when SIZE was added to distinfo. Most maintainers > and committers added the SIZE to their ports, but after some time > someone stepped up and did an automated commit to add SIZE to all those > ports that did not yet have it added. > >=20 > > Is "do nothing" the appropriate thing to do in this case (from > > maintainer's point of view)? > >=20 > If you want, you can submit one big PR with the diffs for all your ports > at once, but I'm hoping that again someone will step up and do an > automated commit in some way or another. If someone can do this in a way that is=20 *** Careful *** i.e. they: * verify that they are not committing random other changes together with the sha checksum * deal with the fact that 'make checksum' on their machine may not add checksums for all of the files listed in distinfo (and in such a case will actually remove them, breaking the port for others) then it would be better to do them in batches instead of getting committers to deal with hundreds of individual PRs. Kris --yNb1oOkm5a9FJOVX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDcj7FWry0BWjoQKURAlF8AKCGJ9lu0y447qOg5397sGPRXjMokgCeOfih VFgOWdQozcKLQDrWVx0AVOw= =rwUW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --yNb1oOkm5a9FJOVX--