On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 01:18:49PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > From: Thomas Huth <[email protected]> > > The functional testing frameworks also supports assets that are > identified by their sha512 checksum (instead of only using sha25), > and at least one of the tests (tests/functional/ppc64/test_fadump.py) > is already using such a checksum, so adjust the clean_functional_cache > script to support these checksums, too.
I wrote this code to match what we had in Avocado, but now I'm really struggling to justify why we should choose different checksum algorithms per asset. With only 1 test diverging from sha256, I'd rather we just dropped sha512 support > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <[email protected]> > --- > scripts/clean_functional_cache.py | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/clean_functional_cache.py > b/scripts/clean_functional_cache.py > index c3370ffbb87..f0342b4b438 100755 > --- a/scripts/clean_functional_cache.py > +++ b/scripts/clean_functional_cache.py > @@ -24,8 +24,8 @@ > os.chdir(cache_dir) > > for file in cache_dir.iterdir(): > - # Only consider the files that use a sha256 as filename: > - if len(file.name) != 64: > + # Only consider the files that use a sha256 or sha512 as filename: > + if len(file.name) != 64 and len(file.name) != 128: > continue > > try: > -- > 2.52.0 > With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
