Bug 29310
| Summary: | Fix bento checksum errors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | pat <pat> | ||||
| Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | Steve Price <steve> | ||||
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | ||||||
| Priority: | Normal | ||||||
| Version: | Latest | ||||||
| Hardware: | Any | ||||||
| OS: | Any | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
pat
2001-07-30 01:20:00 UTC
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 08:19:43PM -0400, pat@databits.net wrote: > > >Description: > Fix most checksum errors from bento. [patch elided] In most of these cases we'll need to understand what changed in the distfiles before these changes can be committed. -steve Nothing that would break it.
Up PORTREVISION too.
-pat
On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Steve Price wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 08:19:43PM -0400, pat@databits.net wrote:
> >
> > >Description:
> > Fix most checksum errors from bento.
> [patch elided]
>
> In most of these cases we'll need to understand what changed
> in the distfiles before these changes can be committed.
>
> -steve
>
>
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:42:41PM -0400, Patrick Li wrote: > Nothing that would break it. We still would like to know what changed. > Up PORTREVISION too. Why and for which ones? -steve Is it not needed to up PORTREVISION for all
checksum chase commits?
We = you
i would like to see bento stop erroring.
changes probabily is so minor that author
decided not to make new version.
-pat
On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Steve Price wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:42:41PM -0400, Patrick Li wrote:
> > Nothing that would break it.
>
> We still would like to know what changed.
>
> > Up PORTREVISION too.
>
> Why and for which ones?
>
> -steve
>
>
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:53:45PM -0400, Patrick Li wrote: > Is it not needed to up PORTREVISION for all > checksum chase commits? No. > We = you We includes me, the security officers, and anyone else that cares about the ports collection or the security of their box. Blindly committing checksum updates without knowing what changed could create problems. > i would like to see bento stop erroring. As would I but changing stuff to make bento happy without knowing why they need to be fixed could be disastrous. > changes probabily is so minor that author > decided not to make new version. The word "probably" is the problem. If we know what changed then we know if a PORTREVISION bump is required, whether someone planted a trojan or other security risk in the distfile, or whether the author decided to change his/her email address in a README. -steve Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports->steve I got this one. Many thanks to Patrick Li for taking the time to track down these and attempt to fix them. I'll go through them and figure out why they changed and commit the ones that don't need further review. not blindingly. like i said i tested it already
if you are insisting on me giving you reason
i'll go ahead and diff them right now.
-pat
On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Steve Price wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:53:45PM -0400, Patrick Li wrote:
> > Is it not needed to up PORTREVISION for all
> > checksum chase commits?
>
> No.
>
> > We = you
>
> We includes me, the security officers, and anyone else that
> cares about the ports collection or the security of their
> box. Blindly committing checksum updates without knowing
> what changed could create problems.
>
> > i would like to see bento stop erroring.
>
> As would I but changing stuff to make bento happy without
> knowing why they need to be fixed could be disastrous.
>
> > changes probabily is so minor that author
> > decided not to make new version.
>
> The word "probably" is the problem. If we know what changed
> then we know if a PORTREVISION bump is required, whether
> someone planted a trojan or other security risk in the distfile,
> or whether the author decided to change his/her email address in
> a README.
>
> -steve
>
>
State Changed From-To: open->closed I am originator and this PR is old. Ports have been all fixed/updated over time while this PR is collecting dust. |
