On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:45:04 -0500 solar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you do that please set it as a blocker for the .54 release. > Reintroducing ChangeLog/metadata.xml to Manifests would be a undesired > regression. Nothing in the portage as of <=.53 make direct use of > those two files and there is no security value in bloating the digest > format with them. Thats why they were removed 2.0.51.21 > > Making the argument for maybe portage in the future will use them is > not valid as they are currently omited and we/I have been told before > by the portage team (ferringb & jstubbs iirc??) that portage itself > wont be doing any .xml parsing in it's core. IE So that means not > today nor tomorrow will anything need to depend on those files in > order to build.
Name a single portage version that does *not generate* manifest entries for them (hint: there is none). They are only ignored right now during verification. So it's in no way a regression. Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
