Am Sat, 02 Jul 2016 09:55:04 +0200 schrieb Joachim Breitner <nome...@debian.org>:
> Hi Edward, > > we treat it as opaque, but we currently try to match on a precise, > predictable length – this seems to be more reliable than just matching > on any sequence of characters. It helps, like, you know, types :-) > > But we can easily adjust. You can help us by giving a definite > description of how package IDs can look like nowadays, e.g. as a > regex. Until we get such a description, I propose we just extract the hash by taking everything from the last hyphen to the end of the package id as the hash. I pushed the relevant changes to the branch 'short-ids', because I still have to test some cases and wanted to give others the possibility to object. Regards Sven > Am Freitag, den 01.07.2016, 19:46 -0400 schrieb Edward Z. Yang: > > Yeah, we started compressing the IDs so that they take less > > length. Is there something we can do to make things easier > > for packagers? In general, these identifiers are supposed > > to be treated as opaque. > > > > Edward > > > > Excerpts from Joachim Breitner's message of 2016-07-01 06:16:24 > > -0400: > > > Hi Edward, > > > > > > Am Freitag, den 01.07.2016, 09:54 +0000 schrieb Clint Adams: > > > > When building tf-random with ghc 8, an id of > > > > > > > > tf-random-0.5-4z8OJUaXC1FRNfrLPFWAD > > > > > > > > is produced. Since this is the wrong length, this breaks > > > > Dh_Haskell.sh . > > > > > > > > Can someone explain what's happening and what should be done > > > > instead? > > > > > > previously, we (Debian Haskell packagers) could rely on package > > > hashes > > > to be 32 characters. Has this changed with GHC-8 somehow?
pgpK7SuCEFYL9.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
