Hey folks,
We currently make 4 different checksums files for installer, live and
openstack images published from cdimage.d.o (aka get.d.o, cloud.d.o):
MD5SUMS, SHA1SUMS, SHA256SUMS and SHA512SUMS.
Prompted by a discussion on irc a couple of days back, I'm looking
into dropping generation of the o
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:58:13PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> ...I'm looking
> into dropping generation of the older, less secure MD5 and SHA1
> checksums. I'm planning on leaving these alone for existing releases,
> including for future stretch and buster point release builds. But for
> regula
I wouldn't object to dropping the older hashes completely
On 16 July 2019 16:04:28 BST, Holger Levsen wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:58:13PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> ...I'm looking
>> into dropping generation of the older, less secure MD5 and SHA1
>> checksums. I'm planning on leavin
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:58:13PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>Hey folks,
>
>We currently make 4 different checksums files for installer, live and
>openstack images published from cdimage.d.o (aka get.d.o, cloud.d.o):
>MD5SUMS, SHA1SUMS, SHA256SUMS and SHA512SUMS.
>
>Prompted by a discussion on i
Hi Thomas!
On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 06:21:30PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>
>this text is about the partition table layouts of EFI-ready bootable ISO 9660
>images and the opportunity to unify and improve them.
>
>Overview:
>- Situation
>- Flaws and remedy options
>- Change proposals for debian-cd
5 matches
Mail list logo