sha1 and rmd160

[Craig Treleaven]

At 7:56 AM -0500 4/6/12, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
>  > Just curious, why two checkums?  Is one not sufficient?
>
>Here we go again :-)
>

I'm not trying to pick a scab.  Just found it curious when I was 
working on a portfile that both were recommended without offering any 
reasons why.

Hadn't thought about malicious alteration of the distfiles.  I 
presumed it was to detect garbled transmission.

Craig