On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Kevin Fenzi wrote:On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 12:08:11 +0200 Kevin Kofler <kevin kofler chello at> wrote:Jesse Keating wrote:Also, it means that not all of our package set has the sha256 checksum, which is a checkbox item.Speaking of that, can RPM itself be built with SHA256 now that F11 Beta is out? IMHO it doesn't make sense to still support upgrades (directly) from F11 Alpha.Yeah, I agree. Panu?Just did this for rawhide. Personally I couldn't care much less what digests rpm package for a release X is using but if you want to break the freeze for this then sure I can switch F11 rpm to default digests too.
unless there is a compellingly good reason to do it - I'd say keep it as it is, now. so that:
1. people could, conceivably go from not-quite-current F10 to F11GA 2. change == breakage as a general rule. -sv