cvs commit: ports/Tools/scripts distinfochecker

Kris Kennaway kris at
Wed Jan 25 17:35:54 PST 2006

On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 12:28:22PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-Jan-25 18:38:40 -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >AFAIK duplicate checksums are OK - they are useful if e.g. mirrors
> >have different versions of the distfile that are functionally
> >identical.  Duplicate SIZE causes errors though (arguably a bug).
> Different, but functionally identical, versions of a distfile are
> highly likely to also have different sizes.  If you're going to allow
> different checksums, you need to allow for different sizes as well.

Yeah, currently you'd have to drop the size checking (which is mostly
just an optimization to avoid downloading changed/corrupted versions).

> Doing this without opening potential security holes means changing the
> distfiles entries to be tuples of {filename,size,md5,shd-256} (where
> anything except the filename is optional).  A downloaded file would
> have to completely match one of the tuples for it to be acceptable.
> How many cases are there where there are multiple, equivalent,
> versions of distfiles on the net?

A distfile somewhere in the ports collection changes checksum about
once a week or so.  I don't have data on how often the above situation
(different versions on different sites) occurs, but it must occur
occasionally when the software mirror sites are not quick to update.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the cvs-all mailing list