On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>wrote:
On 11/26/2012 01:00 PM, Lior Kaplan wrote:
I'd like to raise the question why do we need the full SHA1 for as the
build ID?
(See
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/**libreoffice/core/commit/?id=**
b7e6c8459b15a4fdb9ebb269b27cde**ea82c8c5c2<http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=b7e6c8459b15a4fdb9ebb269b27cdeea82c8c5c2>
)
Using the abbreviated version looks weird enough for users, and I think
the full version won't add anything.
Technically they are the same (correct me if I'm wrong).
The abbreviated form is much more prone for collision than the
unabbreviated one, and the core git repo indeed already has at least one
collision of abbreviated SHA1s. Try "git show 349fa28a".
Thanks, although I couldn't find the other commit (the first is
349fa28a5998d10b110da1a7fcc6b5b24d5940b1)
Kaplan
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.