| 1 |
On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 10:36:23PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
| 2 |
> I personally think that we need to look into providing more finegrained |
| 3 |
> distfiles. The best proposal I heard up til now is name rewriting. An ebuild |
| 4 |
> specifies how a distfile is to be called. Portage then needs to be smart |
| 5 |
> enough to use the renamed file from the mirrors, but the normal one from the |
| 6 |
> main repository. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Shouldn't this be easy with digests? It checks the checksum of it's local |
| 9 |
file. If it isn't the same as the one in the digest file, it assumes it is an |
| 10 |
old distfile and dowloads a more recent one. If even that one fails, the |
| 11 |
ebuild fails with the normal "digest failed" error. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Wkr, |
| 14 |
Sven Vermeulen |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-- |
| 17 |
Thanks to DRM, you know that something has been built in environment of |
| 18 |
unspecified degree of security, from source you cannot check, written by |
| 19 |
programmers you don't know, released after passing QA of unknown quality and |
| 20 |
which is released under a license that disclaims any responsibility... |
Archives