"Alexandros Papadopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My question is, is it acceptable to have so many important and > widely used packages in *stable* without MD5 checksums?
MD5 checksums aren't mandatory, so quite a few packages don't have them. We hope to change this for future releases, but the number of affected packages is still too important to make it a release goal. See the following page for up-to-date statistics: http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/md5sums-check/ (They apply to sid, not etch.) I set this up back in August: http://blog.orebokech.com/2007/08/debian-packages-without-md5sums.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/08/msg00708.html Cheers, -- ,''`. : :' : Romain Francoise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `. `' http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/ `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
