On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Alistair Crooks wrote:

> 
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:16:07 +0100 (BST), David Brownlee wrote:
> 
> >  	Another (smaller) saving could be reached by putting 'patch-sum'
> >  	into 'md5'. This makes more sense if we go to a single patch file
> >  	as it would be less clutter in md5.
> 
> I can't remember why I did it that way to begin with - something about not
> forcing the existence of patch-sum files, I think, but it was a long time
> ago. And, thankfully, the bugs we used to see reported have all but gone
> away with the existence of the patch-sum files, although they can be a pain
> sometimes, especially if you're maintaining packages.
> 
> It's fine by me to lump all the checksums into one file, but I'd like it to

as long as packages with different DISTFILES per arch don't end up with
broken md5's (think acroread).

-Dan