2008/6/2 Sebastian Nowicki <sebnow@gmail.com>:
It is an issue, but openssl is only 7mb, which should be an issue on
On 02/06/2008, at 6:58 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Antonio Huete Jimeenz
> <ahuete.devel@gmail.com> wrote:
>> For the checksum verification it might be ok to use openssl since
>> it's in
>> base for almost all BSD system. But what about linux? You'll have
>> to install
>> it before using makepkg, and this means a dependency.
>>
>> In the case of CHOST usage, I haven't explained it fine. It's not
>> related to
>> this checksum issue. I'll try to explain it better in another
>> thread :)
>>
>
> openssl is in the base group of archlinux, so it is supposed to be
> installed on every system.
> But when you look at the number and the importance of the packages
> requiring it, it is fully justified :
> http://archlinux.org/packages/122/
> I can even hardly imagine a linux distro without it. Or am I mistaken?
almost all systems, and on embedded systems where disk space may be
scarce, Archlinux probably wouldn't run anyway (afaik there's a
project for that purpose). As Xavier mentioned it's in core, so with a
typical install (installing everything in base), it should be
installed on the system.
From what I understand the BSD tools (md5, sha1, etc) all use cksum.
> As far as I know md5sum program in BSD is /sbin/md5, so maybe
> there's something like that in MacOS.
It uses completely different arguments than the Linux equivalent, so
it would be difficult to implement. I think openssl is the best
compromise.
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev