| 1 |
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò |
| 2 |
<flameeyes@×××××××××.eu> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On 20/02/2013 13:02, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>> I'm actually wondering if that makes sense with git when a specific |
| 5 |
>> commit is referenced, since everything is content-hashed anyway. |
| 6 |
>> Perhaps we just need to confirm that git actually checks the hash. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> The policy is also because any ebuild relying on a network service to |
| 9 |
> work cannot be assured to work at any point in time: not only it depends |
| 10 |
> on the network connection of the user, but it also depends on the |
| 11 |
> service to be available. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Makes sense in general. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
If there really are firmware blobs that are only available via git and |
| 16 |
which cannot be redistributed we might consider whether it makes sense |
| 17 |
to not support them entirely, or to force them to be masked. Dropping |
| 18 |
or masking the packages doesn't fix the fact that they require a |
| 19 |
network service to install - it just makes it harder to install the |
| 20 |
package. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
If a tarball exists or can be created that would be the best solution |
| 23 |
all-around, of course. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Rich |
Archives