| 1 |
>>>>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> +in 2⁴ = 16 directories), and each of this directories would have |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
s/this/these/ (This was there before, but can be corrected while at it.) |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> +The implementations are only required to support cutoffs being multiples |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
s/The implementations/Implementations/ |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> +and maintaining mirrors via ``emirrordist``. The implementation |
| 12 |
> +supports both listed layouts, with all hash functions supported |
| 13 |
> +by Portage and cutoffs being multiples of 4. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
In the rationale section, one reason given for the choice of the hash |
| 16 |
algorithm (BLAKE2B) was to "avoid code duplication". Isn't that argument |
| 17 |
moot, if all hashes supported by Portage are implemented? (Or in other |
| 18 |
words, couldn't a faster hash function like MD5 be used?) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Ulrich |
Archives