From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OSc4E-0004v4-V4 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:33:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BEAF9E0BE6; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:33:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-iw0-f181.google.com (mail-iw0-f181.google.com [209.85.214.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7489CE0BDA for ; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:33:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iwn10 with SMTP id 10so169270iwn.40 for ; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 13:33:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=prpoMi3+gO4sjCensoXTbW/UbnTErm7tdU1IU9OLeHs=; b=mw/PFIBEk+krZCdH7OXDl7BPaoiroagsbaRPPrC8sIibCqWvOUyeFTlw/pGomTBV1x sp1If9Nc/IeRID7ihKxyzXYgaWO+9QS9u03Jm1zfHVRwFYqJMTWOnRuZbMskp+snzt/6 XmUCz0p8gdrSK9QrRe9mo/Ikh/SLskCH3ZPMA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=MIr/SRrL2leZabTOSWJ3J9Nzb23N72nXU/zXF+nZLNyebJlEoplpgJaKzTcZ+nmaIJ ixu5K51Z+YcJgHN73kLzMNRZEyA1G1sY/emQnhn0jIS+jCzTpduI1rZ4/JgMaue3Oanp +7vpTQRD9gaA+bh4V4yHhurYo7XoePIUXbJck= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.158.203 with SMTP id g11mr2872584ibx.24.1277584407128; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 13:33:27 -0700 (PDT) Sender: nirbheek.chauhan@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.150.68 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 13:33:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100626205921.4e2a0b9e@snowcone> References: <20100625201738.GA4789@nibiru.local> <4C2518FB.9090800@gentoo.org> <20100626185104.GB4789@nibiru.local> <4C265345.6060102@gentoo.org> <20100626194639.GE4789@nibiru.local> <20100626205921.4e2a0b9e@snowcone> Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 02:03:27 +0530 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ur9VF5bAUtVq_P_36XHjlqRJ6wU Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] FYI: Rules for distro-friendly packages From: Nirbheek Chauhan To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 2368eb49-70ff-477d-9523-522e1c0d0269 X-Archives-Hash: 7cd236a2f62fdba97f1c3021d8a71d40 On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 21:46:39 +0200 > Enrico Weigelt wrote: >> BTW: if upstream has an proper VCS and an canonical tagging >> scheme, they don't actually have to create release tarballs, >> just hack up a little script which creates them on-the-fly >> from an canonical URL scheme (eg. oss-qm does exactly that). > > Down that path lies madness. There's no guarantee that you'll get the > same tarball if you request the same URL twice in a row, particularly > if you're using one of those new-fangled new compression schemes. > Or if they generate the tarball on-the-fly with no caching, which results in differing timestamps each time. Hence, each time you fetch it, you get a tarball with a different hash. No, don't ask where I saw such a thing :p -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team