Re: [Dev-luatex] md5.sum

On 18 January 2010 Aditya Mahajan wrote:

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Reinhard Kotucha wrote:

...

If I can evaluate, for instance, luatex.datestamp, I can enable MD5 checks in my script on sytems where it works. That would be nice.

How about

if (md5.sumhexa("abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz") == "c3fcd3d76192e4007dfb496cca67e13b") then -- md5 works... do what you want else -- fallback for md5 not working end

Hi Aditya, this is a brilliant idea. Thank you very much. I adopted my file accordingly. It's availble from http://tug.org/~kotucha/getnonfreefonts I simply skip the MD5 checks if they don't work. On my 64-bit Gentoo system I get: Installing texmf/scripts/getnonfreefonts/getnonfreefonts.pl ... [done] Installing texmf/doc/man/man1/getnonfreefonts.1 ... [done] Installing texmf/doc/man/man1/getnonfreefonts-sys.1 ... [done] Fixing File Permissions ... [done] However, Gentoo allows me to execute 32-bit binaries if I put bin/i386-linux into $PATH instead of bin/x86_64-linux. Then I get: Installing texmf/scripts/getnonfreefonts/getnonfreefonts.pl ... [done] Installing texmf/doc/man/man1/getnonfreefonts.1 ... [done] Installing texmf/doc/man/man1/getnonfreefonts-sys.1 ... [done] md5sum: 028f96580787066ac0084251e2ccc915 getnonfreefonts.pl ... [ok] md5sum: f850d910dd96ee27cecdb3772047d247 getnonfreefonts.1 ... [ok] md5sum: fb2b0f7699db8e627d4e26b730e94928 getnonfreefonts-sys.1 ... [ok] Fixing File Permissions ... [done] This is exactly what I want to achieve. Thanks again.

This way, you also protect yourself from bugs in the future versions of luatex :-)

There will be no bugs in future versions of luatex. I obviously know Taco better than you. :) Regards, Reinhard -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reinhard Kotucha Phone: +49-511-3373112 Marschnerstr. 25 D-30167 Hannover mailto:reinhard.kotucha@web.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------