|Re: [eigen] Providing non-tag downloads over BitBucket|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/eigen Archives
- To: eigen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [eigen] Providing non-tag downloads over BitBucket
- From: Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:48:52 -0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=ukl8zqBTDSHGXf6a+jjkqCtqAdzOCi3Lr+nw+wg450k=; b=j3fMCucYTTLpGzvF53CLZY271yiZmgJLXis3RgB2ZftKBcMNJvoufNSrWBhAbjDGwB P5MqLGAK+vGzYaTPd61Cp/7fj2FQhmctGrZ0+6kD9YRP2BHZmgxJa2bXWFq2GS1T40WA ItnzCnEBCKa2nveqEbvvJrLNtO/rFteRqLkG8=
Thomas Capricelli <orzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Ok, i went and searched for more information. Because of some
> unrelated problem, bitbucket indeed made a change in how tarballs are
> generated. The change was done in november.
It is interesting that Linux distributions have not noticed this either
(Gentoo, ArchLinux and Fedora at least also have wrong checksums).
> I'm surprised you (bsd devs) only have this problem with eigen and not
> other packages.
In some cases, the projects offer non-tagged tarballs in BitBucket and
are thus no subject to this kind of change; in other cases, fetching the
tarball may lead to an HTTP 302 status code and the tarball hosted in
FreeBSD's mirrors is then fetched etc (the total number of packages with
their tarballs hosted in BitBucket is small, though).
> Anyway, this is not something we can change... I've talked to some guy
> from bitbucket, and they now are aware of the problemm s that we can
> just hope they wont change this anymore... and update those checksums.
> Sorry for that :-(
It also happened earlier in 2011:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159690 (at the time, the
change looked like the exact opposite of the one which happened in