> I have a different memory of events. This proposal was brought > up on this list, and was shot down because > a) It really provides no security. It is not for *this* security reason (crackers, hackers and others)
> b) It would bloat the packaging system, when it does not really solve > the problem Good policy could help. > c) It does not address the config files, which are quite as critical > -- more critical, in fact, than other files, because other files > can be foxed by reistalling the packages from a known good > archive/CD Config files could be excluded from md5sums. > d) There are standalone solutions that do a good job -- though we may > need to work on free replacements. You mean free solutions? A few weeks ago I had a system crash. I had to check which packages was broken. I had to do this _quickly_ and _easly_. I lost a lot of time because I had to do it manually - a lot of packages didn't have md5sums check file. md5sums doesn't repend of dpkg. It is possible to use "3rd party" tool like debsums. -- Piotr "Dexter" Roszatycki mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
