Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

sha256 :no_check as synonym for no_checksum #3107

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 25, 2014

Conversation

rolandwalker
Copy link
Contributor

Introduces new form sha256 :no_check as a synonym for no_checksum.
Backend code also cleaned up to use self-documenting symbol instead of special-behavior zero.

The new syntax is intentionally left undocumented. The plan would be to have
this code in release for at least a month before transitioning Casks to use it.

Rationale: simplification.

  • DSL declaration md5 was removed in remove md5 checksum support #2931.
  • sha1 is deprecated, we may as well move towards its removal.
  • With this PR, the oddball no_checksum declaration can also be removed.
  • That's 3 fewer declarations in the DSL, with equivalent functionality.

rolandwalker added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2014
`sha256 :no_check` as synonym for `no_checksum`
@rolandwalker rolandwalker merged commit abe1f17 into Homebrew:master Feb 25, 2014
@rolandwalker rolandwalker deleted the dsl_no_check_syntax branch February 25, 2014 17:29
@muescha
Copy link
Contributor

muescha commented Feb 26, 2014

there should be 2 different values stored in @Sums :no_check and :no_checksum for better error messages.

otherwise the error messages get a little confusing in this cases:

sha1 :no_check
sha256 2342334t34t

sha1 :no_check
sha256 :no_check

@rolandwalker rolandwalker mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2014
@Homebrew Homebrew locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 8, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants