[oe] OEDEM 2009 summary: Death to checksums.ini?

[Holger Hans Peter Freyther]

On Tuesday 10 November 2009 17:55:40 Phil Blundell wrote:
> The current checksums.ini arrangement has a number of issues:
> 
>  - single monolithic file is a rich source of merge conflicts
>  - concrete URIs require many duplicate entries for different mirrors
>  - can be annoying for folks using overlays and/or collections
>  - storing the checksum separately from the rest of the .bb file makes
> cherry-picking harder than it needs to be
>  - large amount of churn in checksums.ini can make it hard to spot cases
> where checksums were changed rather than just added.
> 
> It was proposed that, rather than storing checksums centrally in
> checksums.ini, they should be placed in the individual .bb file to which
> the checksum relates.  Bitbake already has a certain level of support
> for reading checksums from SRC_URI and it would seem natural to try to
> make use of that.

*sigh*

SRC_URI = "http://example.org/${PN}-${PV}.tar,bz2"

how do you want to handle these? What happens if you place a checksum in the 
inc file? Do you want to propose removing SRC_URI from .ini files and put them 
back to the .bb files?


z.