2012/3/28  <[email protected]>:
> From: Alex J Lennon <[email protected]>
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex J Lennon <[email protected]>
> ---
>  recipes/libpng/libpng_1.2.48.bb |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/recipes/libpng/libpng_1.2.48.bb b/recipes/libpng/libpng_1.2.48.bb
> index 50a3c03..534962d 100644
> --- a/recipes/libpng/libpng_1.2.48.bb
> +++ b/recipes/libpng/libpng_1.2.48.bb
> @@ -2,5 +2,5 @@ require libpng.inc
>
>  PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
>
> -SRC_URI[libpng.md5sum] = "7612af5660cd4b5e8c433ce53bea01a7"
> -SRC_URI[libpng.sha256sum] = 
> "f6db51aff81b6920203678b29e8c68a5e3703cf5b39ae5e9e56370d17f31b1c4"
> +SRC_URI[libpng.md5sum] = "74c8c261bdf9a75274e22875183fda07"
> +SRC_URI[libpng.sha256sum] = 
> "b4c92df11eadf3e81705a58253dbffc4b95169186899e28abdfc8aada8a20fcc"
> --
> 1.7.5.4
>
You mean upstream changed their source tarball (or whatever) without
updating the version number.
Yuk.

Guess we might want to mirror a version and pull from the mirror.
(changing the checksum alone creates issues because other people might
already have the version with the old checksum in their downloads.

Frans

PS: thinking of it: we might be able to resolve the latter issue by
forcing the removal of a file from downloads (and trigger a refetch)
if the .md5 does not match the md5 in the recipe.

_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Reply via email to