Excuse the cross post, I wanted to get this out to the Ant and Maven lists as well.

In the larger community the BSD default format is refered to as SVF (Simple File Verification) and the GNU md5sum format as MD5SUM, I suspect it would be good to see these as output features/options that could be set within Ant and Maven to allow developers to choose the md5 output format one would like to use. Yes, I do believe this would be an excellent feature enhancement to these tools.


Mark R. Diggory wrote:

Both Maven and Ant only insert only the checksum into the file. I believe they resolve the location of the actual source file from the name of the checksum file, which forces all checksum files to reside in the same directory as thier source files.

This represents a problem if you want verify the generated checksum on *nix or BSD using md5sum or cksum as these tools require the file path (relative to the md5) to actually be present in the md5 file and I do not believe there is any way around this.


Martin Cooper wrote:

Do you happen to know which flavour Ant creates? For Struts releases,
the Ant build file generates the MD5 files using the <checksum> task.
That seems like a pretty obvious way to generate them for any project
that uses Ant, but the task doesn't appear to have any switch for
determining flavour (and the docs don't appear to say anything about
different flavours of MD5).

Martin Cooper

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:06:00 -0400, Mark R. Diggory

A subject came up on the Tomcat developers list which we thought should
be shared with the whole community.

Specifically, it was found that BSD's default md5 format is not parsable
by some external programs that clients are using to verify the integrity
of our downloads.

While we thought this not "mission critical", we did think it wise that
we should begin making the following recommendation when creating md5
signatures for files.

We discovered there is a "-r" option which makes BSD md5 generate md5
signature format that is the same as that of GNU's md5sum, a more
prevalent tool for generating checksums of files.

We also found that on BSD, "cksum" is comparable to to GNU's "md5sum
--check" functionality and that it works on both the BSD and GNU file

Our recommendation is that Apache should be signing with the more
prevalent GNU formated output so that other file integrity software
available on platforms other than BSD can verify the file integrity more
easily. This is simply accomplished by adding the -r option

For Example:
%md5 -r foo.bar > foo.bar.md5

We should remember that md5 signatures are for the public to verify the
integrity of our software package distributions. Making sure that
"everyone" can verify our file integrity is probably more important than
maintaining a platform specific format because it is the default for the
OS these were generated on.

-Mark Diggory

Mark R. Diggory wrote:

For example here are the outputs of the various signing tools we use at
this time:

BSD md5:

> md5 commons-collections-3.1.jar
MD5 (commons-collections-3.1.jar) = d1dcb0fbee884bb855bb327b8190af36

while the GNU md5 script generates the following:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] jars]$ md5sum commons-collections-3.1.jar
d1dcb0fbee884bb855bb327b8190af36  commons-collections-3.1.jar

And maven just generates and uses:

Yes, the nice thing about BSD md5 is that the -r can be used to make it
look like the GNU md5sum output, it would probably be good if we started
to use this as it will be more prevalent and possibly is the closest one
can get to a standard:

> md5 -r commons-collections-3.1.jar
d1dcb0fbee884bb855bb327b8190af36 commons-collections-3.1.jar

Mark R. Diggory wrote:

This is the md5 output generated by BSD md5 and not necessarily a
"standard", GNU md5sum generates a different format that is not
"standard" as well. For maven, just the checksum portion of the
content is stored in the file.

It would be nice if there was a standard in this area, but I have yet
to see one in the internet community. We have the same problem with
generating md5 checksums for the maven repository at the moment.


Shapira, Yoav wrote:

The format I use for MD5 sums is the standard one. Every other project
I know uses this format, so I think if anything this user needs to
adjust his preferences ;) However, if there's a standard or spec
somewhere that mandates we use md5 -r (reverse output format), then
sure, someone point me to it and I'll follow that spec when signing

Yoav Shapira
Millennium Research Informatics

-----Original Message-----
From: jean-frederic clere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 5:26 AM
To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: Re: Fwd: md5 sums for jakarta downloads

Pier Fumagalli wrote:

Begin forwarded message:

From: Andy Mudrak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 August 2004 00:57:44 BST
Subject: md5 sums for jakarta downloads


I noticed that your MD5 sums on your website are not all formatted
correctly. I specifically downloaded the Tomcat 5.0.27 MD5 file,


found this out. Not that it's a big deal or anything like that, but
it'd be good to have the MD5 properly formatted, that is the MD5 sum
and then the file name...

I am not sure that is a good idea: +++ -bash-2.05b$ openssl md5 toto MD5(toto)= efd6b079984c77cd80254ff266e9ab43 +++

And looking in the Jakarta "Binary downloads" I have found that a lot


MD5 file are using the Tomcat format.


Andy Mudrak



To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Mark R. Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to