Piotr Roszatycki wrote: > > a) It really provides no security. > It is not for *this* security reason (crackers, hackers and others) > [...] > > A few weeks ago I had a system crash. I had to check which packages was > broken. I had to do this _quickly_ and _easly_. > I lost a lot of time because I had to do it manually - a lot of packages > didn't have md5sums check file. > > md5sums doesn't repend of dpkg. It is possible to use "3rd party" tool > like debsums.
I agree. I didn't second the proposal because I thought it helped security, I seconded the proposal because it helps to find corrupted file after a system crash. I think that those that oppose the proposal should propose to _remove_ the md5sums file (since they think they bloat the system and have no purpose). It's all or nothing in my view. Peter
