On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 12:53 -0400, James Antill wrote:
> I have 4 branches which might be worth putting in for 3.2.18, everyone
> may or maynot have looked at them before and they aren't "obviously
> simple/wonderful" enough I've just committed them, so I'll just list
> them and you can tell me what you think...
> 
>    _quickWhatProvides
>    group_pc
>    repo-sacks
> *  repomd-checksums
> 
>   repomd-checksums
> 
>  This adds a checksums dict and a length member to the RepoMD object,
> this is mainly for new style mirror lists. I know Seth had some
> reservations about having "length" be calculated as a checksum ... but I
> can't see another easy way to do it.
> 

Like I said before - not crazy about a lenth checksum b/c it really
isn't.

I have 2 thoughts on this one patch:
 1. we might as well and write it with hashlib now instead of sha
directly, just for future preparation.
 2. would it make any sense to make the 'checksum' of the repomd be the
checksum of the concatenation of the repomd object's checksums? That way
the actual repomd.xml FILE doesn't matter, just the data that it is
carrying.

-sv


_______________________________________________
Yum-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel

Reply via email to