@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

Reply via email to