Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Rust-less bootstrapping (Discussion #2234)
Oh, and that's of course just the "do nothing" scenario. We certainly want to keep the crypto provider build-time switchable, so if somebody wants to take, say, the existing parser and run with it, they're welcome to do so. I only really care about getting it out of *my* hair. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2234#discussioncomment-3913896 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Rust-less bootstrapping (Discussion #2234)
I don't see an issue. For rpm, there must be a way to build it without Rust, this is just for sanity's sake. Those who insist on having signatures all the way through (good luck with that), just consider Rust to be a bootstrap requirement then. It's a choice, like any other. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2234#discussioncomment-3913875 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Rust-less bootstrapping (Discussion #2234)
Bootstrapping without Rust has been mentioned as a requirement on the Fedora development mailing list. However, not being able to verify signatures is a very bad idea for security. This discussion is about trying to resolve this conundrum. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2234 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
