This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-talk
mailing list for the cygwin project.
RE: MD5s of setup.exe on mirrors.
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: "Thread TITTTL'd!" <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 20:03:23 +0100
- Subject: RE: MD5s of setup.exe on mirrors.
- References: <5qd5179mvu.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <4644CB03.9070707@determina.com> <o7d5164e3s.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <063001c7947a$3312cea0$2e08a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> <lblkfu5olv.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <46461FA2.E6EFA773@dessent.net> <i646w3lyh.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <20070513161110.GA5651@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <46489A67.7090503@determina.com> <4648A523.1010705@cygwin.com> <20070514182135.GA6692@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
- Reply-to: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
[ bock-bock because it's getting a bit tired on the main list and the actual
issue is long since dealt with. ]
On 14 May 2007 19:22, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 02:06:27PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>> Alexander Sotirov wrote:
>>> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>> It was actually all academic before since: 1) there was nothing wrong
>>>> with the setup.exe on the mirrors and 2) people shouldn't have been
>>>> running setup.exe from the mirrors to begin with.
>>>
>>> Can you elaborate on why people shouldn't run setup.exe from the mirrors?
>>> I
>>> don't see what is the difference between setup.exe and the other
>>> packages. If
>>> you trust the mirror for all other binaries, why don't you trust it for
>>> setup.exe?
>>
>> Propagation time delays would be one reason. Since it's easy to grab
>> 'setup.exe' from the source, there's no sense using one that might be
>> dated.
>
> That + if you want to talk about trust then you should trust the method
> that we advertise for installing cygwin which is to click on the
> "Install Cygwin Now!" link.
But that /still/ doesn't differentiate between "setup.exe" and any other
random .exe found in the installed packages, so it doesn't explain why there
is a discrepancy in the rules for trusting one particular .exe as compared to
any other.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....