| 1 |
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:59:07 +0900 |
| 2 |
Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Saturday 19 November 2005 20:41, Mike Auty wrote: |
| 5 |
> > If portage can already handle multiple hash formats, |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Portage can't handle multiple hash formats at the moment. It is only |
| 8 |
> smart enough to not throw a fit when other hash formats appear. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Actually all current version (>=2.0.51 IIRC) handle SHA1 digests |
| 11 |
already (others aren't implemented in portage_checksum.py, but will be |
| 12 |
silently ignored). We just don't generate SHA1 yet due to compability |
| 13 |
issues, but those aren't relevant anymore. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> The user will be able to configure what algorithm(s) are used. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
You mean for creation or verification (or both)? |
| 18 |
Generation must be done for all available algorithms IMO. |
| 19 |
Not so sure what to do about verification until the tree is mostly |
| 20 |
covered with SHA1. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> > Having to maintain backwards compatibility with old versions of |
| 23 |
> > portage is a good idea, however just how far back must be supported? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> A year is a good guide. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I'd say 9 months after the ebuild for that version vanished from |
| 28 |
the tree as a minimum, but a year is also fine. |
| 29 |
There are two usergroups creating problems: |
| 30 |
- the ones that only update packages they're interested in (so no |
| 31 |
complete system or world update ever) |
| 32 |
- the ones who only ever update once per year or so (for whatever |
| 33 |
reason) |
| 34 |
Maybe we should request an addition to the handbook "You must update |
| 35 |
sys-apps/portage at least every 6 months"? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Marius |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
| 43 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |
Archives