Checksum fail for ghostscript update

Kurt Pfeifle kurt.pfeifle at
Sat Apr 2 13:59:11 PDT 2016

> > Last night, sourceforge was returning an html file saying that SF was
> > in "disaster recovery mode".  The checksum check baled out at this
> > point.
> >
> > This morning, something a bit different is happening, but there's
> > still a checksum issue.
> That's Upstream re-packaged the
> files we downloaded, but they forgot to update the SHA1SUMS file, so I
> did hold off accepting the change until they confirmed.
> > I wonder whether there might be some way for macports to avoid the use
> > of SF? Googling around, SF seems to have a pretty grubby reputation
> > nowadays.
> I agree, but we're not upstream developers. Please convince the people
> that still use SF to move somewhere else.

Maybe I can convince MacPorts developers to change where they fetch their
own sources?
I'm not sure if it indeed is so -- but the last sentence seems to suggest
to me that MacPorts still fetches GS source tarball from SourceForge.
The primary source is listed here:
Which points to:

Cheers, Kurt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the macports-users mailing list