Well since nobody else spoke, this is what I went with in r142074. Thanks, Jeremy
> On Oct 12, 2015, at 07:00, Daniel J. Luke <[email protected]> wrote: > > I can’t speak for anyone else, but that works for me :) > >> On Oct 11, 2015, at 8:08 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Ok, so if the set includes the union of "good" and "specified", we're all >> happy? >> >>> On Oct 11, 2015, at 13:25, Daniel J. Luke <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> If we really want to encourage people to stop using the weak hashes, we >>> could print a warning if any of them are in the output. >>> >>>> On Oct 11, 2015, at 4:12 PM, Joshua Root <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> How about this: >>>> >>>> * If the checksums specified in the Portfile include sha256, just print >>>> out the actual values for those checksum types. >>>> >>>> * If not, add sha256 to the list when printing out the actual values. >>>> >>>> After all there's no harm in using weak hashes in addition to good ones. >>>> >>>> - Josh >>>> >>>> On 2015-10-12 07:02 , Joshua Root wrote: >>>>> Yes, and I seem to remember having this conversation once before... :) >>>>> >>>>> On 2015-10-12 05:06 , Daniel J. Luke wrote: >>>>>> it’s really useful for the case when upstream publishes a checksum >>>>>> (that’s not one of our default ‘good’ ones) when the output includes the >>>>>> checksums that are in the portfile. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 11, 2015, at 1:34 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>>> Use $default_checksum_types for handy copy/paste output on checksum >>>>>>> failure >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This should help adoption of better, more robust hashing algorithms. > > — > Daniel J. Luke > > +========================================================+ > | *---------------- [email protected] ----------------* | > > | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | > > +========================================================+ > | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | > > | reflect the opinions of my employer. | > > +========================================================+ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > macports-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
