On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 00:25 +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 at 00:00:31, Gordian Edenhofer wrote: > > [...] > > > Why are checksums an issue? You can use the checksum of the > > > correct > > > file. It doesn't match the checksum of the dummy file but I don't > > > see > > > how that is an issue (it is even good since the user immediately > > > notices > > > that something is wrong with the dummy file). Another possibility > > > is > > > to > > > tell makepkg to skip the integrity check. > > > > > > > And *if* we go for solution 2, it should indeed be well > > > > -documented. > > > > > > > > Best, Marcel > > > > > > > > I am against dummy files and would even prefer dropping the patch > > in > > favor of a clean processing of files. > > What do you mean by "clean processing of files"? I consider the > version > with plausibility checks to be cleaner than the version without. >
Basically I was thinking about the exact same problem as you were writing about in your recent mail: It is somewhat inconvenient to package files like this when considering the integrity check done by makepkage. Having a dummy file in the git repo and the true file for the checksum is somewhat odd. Using SKIP is also not a true alternative IMHO. > > Correct me if I am wrong but since the information is extracted from > > the > > .SRCINFO file, the package ttf-m-win8 should work just fine. The > > only > > problem is which files are delivered and which shell be > > downloaded. As Just ignore this part, I misunderstood previous mails. Sorry about that. > > things stand right now everything with " > > ://" or "lp:" in its filename is considered > > an URL and therefore the > > present of the file is not checked. This would potentially ignore > > cases > > where those files are omitted though not downloadable. > > However > > considering that this will help the vast majority where this > > schema > > fits, the minority of missing warnings are > > neglectable. > > Sorry, but I do not follow your argument. The patch uses the same > mechanism as makepkg to check whether a file is local. This kind of check would see files which are named e.g. lp:foo as not missing even if they are.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part