From owner-cvs-ports Thu Dec 12 07:41:09 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id HAA17559 for cvs-ports-outgoing; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 07:41:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from po2.glue.umd.edu (root@po2.glue.umd.edu [129.2.128.45]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id HAA17515; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 07:40:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from maryann.eng.umd.edu (maryann.eng.umd.edu [129.2.103.22]) by po2.glue.umd.edu (8.8.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA06236; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:40:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by maryann.eng.umd.edu (8.8.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA05128; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:40:11 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: maryann.eng.umd.edu: chuckr owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 10:40:11 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey X-Sender: chuckr@maryann.eng.umd.edu To: Michael Smith cc: Satoshi Asami , markm@freefall.freebsd.org, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/SSLeay/files md5 In-Reply-To: <199612120651.RAA03316@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 12 Dec 1996, Michael Smith wrote: > Satoshi Asami stands accused of saying: > > > > Satoshi the checksum-checker > > Speaking of checksums and checking, did my monster-PIB-inspired ports > bogon report get lost, or have I completely missed all the fixups for > it? > > Anyone (markm?) want to try another pass with it? I liked it, Mike, but I would personally like another option. Right now, you can tell it to delete all the stale distfiles it finds. My personal experience with telling programs to go ahead and do their worst is, well, the subject for horror stories. I'm not saying it doesn't work, I'm saying that it's probably asking for too much trust all at one time. Could it be modified to just squash one file at a time? Lots of possible ways this could be done ... my favorite would be to ask me to highlight the candidate for deletion, and just delete that, but another would be to ask permission on each deletion, or maybe to have a user-settable flag to force asking permission on each deletion. Maybe you'd have another idea, anything so long as it doesn't want to do everything at one fell swoop. That makes my blood run cold. Nice job, anyways. Have you seen the newly released visual-tcl tool? ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------