30 Oct
2009
30 Oct
'09
5:32 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 01:08:52PM -0400, Loui Chang wrote:
In both cases if you could omit checksums and makepkg could interpret that as "the packager doesn't really care about integrity, skip checks".
It could print a warning, and you don't need another fancy flag.
And I fear laziness would abound with the result that the end user will be the one left holding the bag. The reality is that a missing checksum will at least cause unnecessary questions of the form: "I got this warning when installing <package>... Is it safe?". At worse, "replacing" said package with a trojaned version would not be recognized soon enough. -- Jeff My other computer is an abacus.