On 30 September 2014 08:53, Chris Tapp wrote:
> I'm not sure this is quite the same - in this case the (downloaded) file and
> checksum would have matched but the remote file has changed.
When upstream change a file we normally hear about it fairly quickly,
and fix the checksum in the recipe. U
On Tuesday 30 September 2014 08:53:08 Chris Tapp wrote:
> On 29 Sep 2014, at 22:59, Burton, Ross wrote:
> > On 29 September 2014 22:36, Chris Tapp wrote:
> >> How would the fetcher handle the file changing after it had already been
> >> downloaded and passed a checksum test? Would the change have
On 29 Sep 2014, at 22:59, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 29 September 2014 22:36, Chris Tapp wrote:
>> How would the fetcher handle the file changing after it had already been
>> downloaded and passed a checksum test? Would the change have been detected?
>
> The checksum comparison is only done at
On 29 September 2014 22:36, Chris Tapp wrote:
> How would the fetcher handle the file changing after it had already been
> downloaded and passed a checksum test? Would the change have been detected?
The checksum comparison is only done at fetch.
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=
I've been working on a bbappend to update bash for Danny in response to
'shellshock'.
Looking at the patches at http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.2-patches/, you
can see that bash42-049 is now dated after bash42-050.
My initial bbappend only included up to bash42-049 as 050 wasn't yet out and
