Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the
URL shown below and enter your comments there.

Changed by [EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=80485

--- shadow/80485        2007-01-09 15:28:45.000000000 -0500
+++ shadow/80485.tmp.26412      2007-01-10 06:32:44.000000000 -0500
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 Bug#: 80485
 Product: Mono: Tools
 Version: 1.0
 OS: unknown
 OS Details: debian 3.1 up-to-date
-Status: NEEDINFO   
+Status: REOPENED   
 Resolution: 
 Severity: Unknown
 Priority: Minor
 Component: tools
 AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]                            
 ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]               
@@ -80,6 +80,36 @@
 - Is there a difference (the way it's built) between the good and bad
 executable ?
 
 - Was this working in earlier version of Mono ? If so which version ?
 
 - How many (incorrectly versus correctly signed) other files do you have ?
+
+------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-01-10 06:32 -------
+Greetings,
+
+* I now noticed, that signcode from yesterday's daily signs incorrecly
+all files - even that was correclty signed with stable release.
+
+
+* This file is just Dr.Web anti-virus scanner, it not installs or
+somehow modifies yr computer, so you may run it freely :)
+
+ But it is updated with unix zip utility - new virus databases are
+packed/updated into it - and stlll it remains windows exe file. Now i
+need to sign it after repacking.
+
+command with which it is updated/created:
+
+/usr/local/bin/zip -j -u cureit.exe *.vdb
+
+
+
+
+* I have tried mono 1.1.9, 1.1.10, and 1.2.0 and in all these packages
+problem persists. I put 1 file signed correclty and 2 incorrectly to
+archive:
+
+http://www.drweb.com/upload/test_1.1.10.zip
+http://www.drweb.com/upload/test_1.1.9.zip
+http://www.drweb.com/upload/test_1.2.0rc0.zip
+
_______________________________________________
mono-bugs maillist  -  [email protected]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs

Reply via email to