On 7/31/19 12:05 PM, Nicolas Mailhot via devel wrote:
> Le mercredi 31 juillet 2019 à 12:25 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III a
> écrit :
>>>>>>> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> writes:
>>
>> KF> * If you use metalinks, rpm signatures are just gravy on top, in
>> the
>> KF> end you are still just trusing SSL CA's.
>>
>> Only if you trust every mirror to always serve authentic content.
> 
> And, just to provide another data point, we tried this month to make
> the network install iso talk to https dnf repos (a reposync of fedora
> devel x86_64, without x86 packages, because we don't have the storage
> budget to mirror 32 bit packages we don't have the use for them
> anyway). The repos themselves worked fine from installed systems. But,
> anaconda refused to use them, till they were re-exposed in plain un-
> secured http.

Any errors? Bug filed? as long as the certs were valid/normal certs,
there should not be any reason that wouldn't work I wouldn't think.

kevin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to