@jessorensen commented on this pull request.
> @@ -430,6 +438,10 @@ typedef enum rpmSigTag_e {
RPMSIGTAG_SHA256 = RPMTAG_SHA256HEADER,
RPMSIGTAG_FILESIGNATURES = RPMTAG_SIG_BASE + 18,
RPMSIGTAG_FILESIGNATURELENGTH = RPMTAG_SIG_BASE + 19,
+ RPMSIGTAG_VERITYSIGNATURES = RPMTAG_SIG_BASE + 20,
+ RPMSIGTAG_VERITYSIGNATURELENGTH = RPMTAG_SIG_BASE + 21,
+ RPMSIGTAG_VERITYSIGNATUREALGO = RPMTAG_SIG_BASE + 22,
+ RPMSIGTAG_VERITYSIGNATUREBLKSZ = RPMTAG_SIG_BASE + 23,
> Yes. So you'd have:
>
> ```
> RPMTAG_VERITYSIGNATURES = RPMTAG_SIG_BASE+24, /* s */
> [...]
> RPMSIGTAG_VERITYSIGNATURES = RPMTAG_VERITYSIGNATURES,
> ```
>
> ...and the similarly for the other tags.
>
> > With regard to the different tags, then for the signature length, it
> > depends on the key used and the algorithm. Are you suggesting we calculate
> > the length of the signature from the length of the signature array and
> > divide it by the number of entries?
>
> I'm not sure what I'm suggesting Storage size as such is not an issue, it's
> just that I find the length tag looking superfluous. Isn't it just "strlen()
> / 2" of the hex data - and once using base64, something you'll get from
> rpmBase64Decode(). It's not a value you need upfront, is it?
Oh that's an interesting point, I'll have a look at that with the base64 code.
If I can derive the size from that, that would be a great win.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/1203#discussion_r431895475_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
