Can we get to the bottom of it? Anton, can you please describe which SHA1 command we are using and which command we should be using? (Again, I think we should stop doing the MD5 hash checksum).
D. On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: > Sha1 file format is also wrong again. It's very frustrating to keep asking > to fix it for last 6 months. I'm abstaining from the vote > > -0 [binding] > > Cos > > > On July 13, 2015 7:31:23 AM PDT, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]> > wrote: > >I think we should just stop using MD5 Hash and just keep using SHA1. In > >my > >experience, the MD5 format is different on different operating systems, > >while the SHA1 works the same in most of the cases. > > > >D. > > > >On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 7:09 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[email protected]> > >wrote: > > > >> I'll take a look. Thanks, Brane! > >> > >> --Yakov > >> > >> 2015-07-13 11:27 GMT+03:00 Branko Čibej <[email protected]>: > >> > >> > On 12.07.2015 08:18, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> > > On 11.07.2015 02:00, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 01:56AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote: > >> > >>> Dear Sirs! > >> > >> If you're trying to please IPMC gramma-busybodies with this - > >don't > >> > bother: > >> > >> they will find a reason why that isn't an appropriate way to > >address > >> > them ;) > >> > > I'm more interested in why 1.3.0-rc1 is still in dist/dev. You > >should > >> > > really immediately delete packages that aren't candidates for > >release, > >> > > anything else just creates confusion. > >> > > >> > Sigh. The SHA1 and MD5 file format is still wrong. Please either > >look it > >> > up if you're faking the format, or use the correct tools to > >generate it. > >> > > >> > Specifically, there should be two spaces between the hash and the > >file > >> > name. > >> > > >> > -- Brane > >> > > >> >
