On 7/12/07, taipan67 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Randy McMurchy wrote: > > Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 07/12/07 13:27 CST: > > > > > >> What about in Additional Downloads vs. part of Package Information? > >> > > > > Because it is not an upstream file, I think it is probably best in > > the "Additional Downloads" section. But that's just my take, perhaps > > Bruce and others have comment as well. > > > > > I think the 'Package Information' section would be more appropriate, > personally, perhaps with a title like "Wget download list-file"...
Well, Randy's point still kind of stands that this is something we generate, not something from upstream. We'll see if there are any other opinions. > ...I also think it's a bit redundant having the same 'md5sum' link on > every page. The ideal would be to split it into categories, & then each > md5sum-file could be saved at the same time as the sources & used with > the '-c' option to check the downloaded files en masse. I'm building > Xorg-7.2 at the moment, & even if i was strictly adherring to the book & > scripting each section, that 'md5sum -c' option would still spew out > loads of annoying errors. As it is, i'm manually checking each package's > md5sum as i go, because i'm building them selectively, one at a time > (i'm including xcb to see how the updates go...). Yeah, that's bothered me a bunch, too. Especially since the book tells you to make separate subdirectories for each section: mkdir proto; cd proto, etc. I could easily split the md5sums file up. Then we'd have something like lib-7.2.wget, lib-7.2.md5, etc. As it is, it's sort of a pain to generate the md5sums file, and I have a sort of managed script to handle these details. The process gets a little easier every time, but it's still kind of error prone. Thoughts on that? -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
