Re: [gNewSense-users] Re: speaking of scripts...

[Chris Andrew]

Sounds like a good idea, Brian.  Would you like to be a little more
specific about the kernel check, so that I can think of the best way
to organise that.

Cheers,

Chris.

On 18/10/2007, Brian Brazil <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 10/18/07, Markus Laire <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On 10/18/07, Chris Andrew <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is a great idea, that could potentially save many hours of work.
> > >
> > > What does anyone think?
> > >
> > > > Realistically, 99% of the time the copyright won't change from version
> > > > to version but we still need to check every package each time we
> > > > distribute a new gNS. Having a program deal with this would save time,
> > > > no? We should take advantage of the fact that we now have (or almost
> > > > have) a database from which to do comparison from. Otherwise, we have
> > > > to do all of the work again from scratch.
> > > >
> > > > Can the script by Tryggvib and Lee be cannibalized to do something like 
> > > > this?
> > > >
> > > > Am I making sense? Or have I missed something in this process?
> >
> > If copyright-files don't usually change *at all* (not even a single
> > character) between releases, then trivial solution would be to
> > calculate e.g. SHA1-checksum for all copyright-files and check whether
> > the checksum has changed.
>
> Considering the small amount of data involved in a given file, doing a
> full comparison will probably be faster and more accurate in the
> two-revision case.
>
> I had already been thinking along these lines for Hardy, as it clearly
> is a big time saving and will greatly reduce the amount of time we
> spend on packages. I'm hoping to use the time we have freed up to
> check every file in the Hardy kernel before it is released.
>
> Brian
>


-- 
Reasons why you may want to try GNU/Linux:

http://www.getgnulinux.org/

A great GNU/Linux distro:

http://wiki.gnewsense.org/