From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24,DMARC_NONE, INVALID_DATE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from mailgw3.netvision.net.il ([194.90.1.11]) by cvs.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #1) id 15QXyu-0005YG-00 for gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:34:28 -0600 Received: from localhost (ras6-p23.rlz.netvision.net.il [62.0.86.151]) by mailgw3.netvision.net.il (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA13888 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 20:32:44 +0300 (IDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Dan Armak To: gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Problem: HOWTOs archive versions X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] References: <01072820141302.04135@localhost> <20010728112125.C12932@cvs.gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20010728112125.C12932@cvs.gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo Technologies, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01072820355404.04135@localhost> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@cvs.gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@cvs.gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat Jul 28 11:35:03 2001 X-Original-Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 20:35:54 +0300 X-Archives-Salt: fa04f47c-ef0c-420f-91b9-f5bdfa8dc1d4 X-Archives-Hash: 40aca9e5dd96c41b35bdc482b5a094f8 On Saturday 28 July 2001 20:21, you wrote: > On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 08:14:13PM +0300, Dan Armak wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > This is not meant to revive the versioning question. > > > > The various app-doc/howto ebuilds (by pm) have no versions, because the > > standard howto archives have none. The ebuilds define version 1.0 > > arbitrarily, but they always download the newest archive with the same > > address and filename. > > > > Do you think we should manage this situation in a better way? > > > > Should we try to work with setting the version dynamically at merge time > > to the archive's timestamp? > > Best solution for right now is to create our own version of the archive > with a timestamp, and write the linuxdoc people to create these archives > with a timestamp (20010728, for example) as the version number: > > linux-howto-20010728.tar.gz OK, but I forgot to introduce the more important question: what about checksums (i.e. message digests)? Should we check for & create a new ebuild for a new timestamp every week or so, or should we override checksums? And how do you override them? -- Dan Armak Gentoo Linux Developer Matan, Israel