Ian Jackson writes: >Bill Mitchell writes ("changes file format"): >> Just out of curiosity, does the following represent a horribly >> formatted and human-unreadable package announcement? Except for >> the lack of a Priority field, it passes the dchanges(1) syntax check. > >I completely fail to understand why anyone is promoting this format.
>It is ugly, make it tabular >and my format is machine readable too. Given the medium we are using that's a tautology :) >847dfb732aa3e994f1917d27ffc20eb3 adduser-1.94-2.deb >70fa124c71e5b709019f6729eb8cfe11 adduser-1.94-2.tar.gz >-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13122 Oct 23 18:43 adduser-1.94-2.deb >-rw-rw-r-- 1 root ian 24448 Oct 23 18:43 adduser-1.94-2.tar.gz ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^ File permissions, link count, ownership an modification times on the maintainer's system are not of general interest, why include them in an announcement? The rest easily fits onto a single line and put the fixed length parts in front. # md5sum size name 70fa124c71e5b709019f6729eb8cfe11 24448 adduser-1.94-2.tar.gz 847dfb732aa3e994f1917d27ffc20eb3 13122 adduser-1.94-2.deb With fixed length fields the dchanges format will yield a nice readable table and a trivial pipe (left as an exercise to the reader) lets you check the md5sum. 'nuf said -- Siggy (the middle S.)