Loui Chang wrote:
On Fri 30 Oct 2009 22:21 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
Loui Chang wrote:
On Fri 30 Oct 2009 15:29 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
Loui Chang wrote:
On Thu 29 Oct 2009 14:40 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
Jeff wrote:
Patch [1] extends the --skipinteg option allow the generation of
a source tarball without requiring the checking of the integrity
checks
You've given the what, but what is the why? If the source integrity is
flawed, then the generated source package is flawed. This seems like
something that should be safeguarded against, IMO.
I can come up with two use cases:
1) making a PKGBUILD for a snapshot release that is always accessible
>from some sort of LATEST release directory symlink. Many projects
use something like that. That way the PKGBUILD does not need updated
every time a snapshot is release. While it may be argued that it is
better to use a svn/cvs/git/etc PKGBUILD, in many cases the snapshots
are generally sanity checked before release.
2) This happens to me occasionally. Someone sends me a PKGBUILD they
can not get working. I see an obvious error, fix it and send the
PKGBUILD back saying "try this" because I really do not want to
download the sources/dependencies to check myself.
In both cases if you could omit checksums and makepkg could interpret
that as "the packager doesn't really care about integrity, skip checks".
In case 2, why would I delete the checksums that are correct and
supplied just because I do not want to download the source to check
them?
How do you know they are correct if you haven't checked them?
Please read case two again. I can assume they are correct given they
were provided to me and I do not want to download the sources to get
them. I have this happen to me around once every week or two which
is one of the reason I was motivated to write this patch.
You can assume sure, but you can't know. It could be a reason behind
your user's problems. The only true way to maintain integrity is to do
the checks.
You can look at it this way: with makepkg you are making a 'source
package' so you want to maintain integrity. If you just want to send
people a bunch o files, tar is a more suitable tool.
It could print a warning, and you don't need another fancy flag.
Note it is not another fancy flag. It is a reuse of an already
Sorry. I guess the man page needs updating. Looks like it's pretty new.
Nope...
man makepkg:
--skipinteg
Do not fail when the PKGBUILD does not contain any integrity
checks, just print a warning instead.
Aha. Thanks, I see it.
implemented flag. And that suggestion would mean that instead of
the current error on no integrity checks, makepkg would instead just
print a warning (which is as good as being silent early in the build
process). My patch, keeps that error and the user has to go out of
their way to use --skipinteg. You would not type this unless you had
a reason, so in the vast, vast majority of cases, the integrity
checks will be performed.
If you're just someone who's building (not the packager) and you're
adding checksums to the PKGBUILD afterwards, you don't really know
whether the source is valid or not. It's a waste of time, and a false
sense of integrity to add them afterwards, and then have to use
--skipinteg.
What is your point here? I never said anything about adding checksums
afterwards. And why would you use --skipinteg after adding
checksums? I am entirely lost... Also, I see no way that not
shipping checksums in a PKGBUILD would give a false sense of
security. You would need to use the --skipinteg flag to build the
package, which would seem to flag insecure to me.
You might add checksums to not have to use --skipinteg, but integrity
actually wouldn't be insured in that case.
You might use --skipinteg after adding checksums if your sources
snapshot changed.
You have a point that needing --skipinteg makes the user aware of
insecure/invalid sources, but that only applies when building binaries for
yourself. Checksums should always be enforced when distributing binaries
to others. So my suggestion of skipping checks if checksums are missing
was flawed. Checks should always be enforced.
The --skipinteg flag just seems like a workaround for the lazy.
I just want to point out that I have run into yet another situation
where --skipinteg when generating a source package would be useful. I
am moving some packages from the Arch repos to the AUR. The md5sums are
obviously correct but I am forced to download the sources. (Well, I am
not as my makepkg is patched... but you get my point).
This is the only case I can think of in makepkg/pacman where we force a
user to do something the "correct" way. For every other check I can
think of, there is a flag to stop it being performed.
Allan
