* Clemens Lang <clemens.l...@bmw-carit.de> [150706 07:24]: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 09:31:14AM +0100, Burton, Ross wrote: > > Github also can and will regenerate these tarballs whenever it feels > > like it, so you'll need to periodically update the checksums. > > Obviously as existing developers will tend to have the tarballs cached > > locally, it can be a while before this failure is reported back.
> While that does happen from time to time it's pretty rare. I see maybe > one case of this every couple of months in MacPorts. Well, we've tried this before, and the changed checksums is causing us all a lot of problems. > Additionally, after a while the checksums generally change back again > in almost all cases. Well, then that's almost twice as bad... That means that once the changed checksum has been detected and patches been submitted, it's likely to change again... :( > So, yes, this brings its own set of problems, but is still a worthwhile > improvement over the current situation IMO. Well, no. Tarballs that has changing checksums is not acceptable. It's going to break new builds, new autobuilders, etc, and just cause everyone unacceptable pain. It's going to give a lot of us a huge support nightmare again... If the checksums can be guaranteed to be stable, then, yes, such a change can be looked upon. Shallow clones is in this case a lot more likely to be usefull, though, implementing that might have a few issues on it's own... Cheers, Anders -- Anders Darander ChargeStorm AB / eStorm AB -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
