[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/3] package/libva: Bump version to 1.4.0
Peter Korsgaard
jacmet at uclibc.org
Tue Oct 7 21:12:03 UTC 2014
>>>>> "Yann" == Yann E MORIN <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr> writes:
Hi,
> ... there are a few other good reasons we accept hashes:
> - it ensures a broken download is detected, so the user quickly knows
> that the tarball is broken because of the download; sometimes,
> upstreams breaks their distributions (e.g. the recent sourceforge
> breakage...).
> - non-compliant downloads are removed (rm -f) so they are not
> accidentally used in another context (e.g. I do share my BR2_DL_DIR
> with other stuff).
> - consequently, it helps the autobuilders prune their failed
> downloads.
> But in the end there is no clear policy, except:
> - we *do* want hashes for security-related packages;
> - hashes for other packages are a nice bonus.
Agreed. It is in no way required, but nice - Especially if upstream
posts hashes.
--
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
More information about the buildroot
mailing list