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

[Phil Blundell]

On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 10:43 +0100, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 November 2009 10:17:42 Phil Blundell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 09:44 +0100, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
> > > This will create an even bigger mess. Sometimes you need to download two
> > > things, this means you will end up with A_MD5SUM, B_MD5SUM, A_SHASUM,
> > > B_SHASUM. The main problem with the above is that in contrast to a well
> > > defined checksums.ini file we will end up with n-variants of the above
> > > trick.
> > 
> > The number of recipes where multiple items need to be downloaded and
> > checksummed is small: this is a tiny minority of the total.  So,
> > although I agree that this case will become more ugly, I don't think
> > this is going to be a common enough problem that it will represent a
> > very big deal.
> 
> It depends. Currently the instructions to update the checksums.ini are 
> straight forward and branch free, with the above it is impossible to write a 
> branch free documentation that everyone can follow. :)

True.  On the other hand, if you are making a recipe with multiple
downloaded tarballs then you are already some way outside what can be
achieved using a straightforward "painting by numbers" approach.  I'm
not sure that the checksums make a material difference to that.

> PS: Let me come up with a patch introducing the new variables..

That'd be great.

p.