Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (579 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse-factory] SUSE-Linux10.1-Beta9-Extra problems
- From: "Ulrich Windl" <ulrich.windl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 08:50:21 +0200
- Message-id: <4434D651.1001.FAC005C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 5 Apr 2006 at 20:42, Joachim Werner wrote:
[...]
Thanks for explaining. I did not consider a "split installation" (local boot with
remote repository).
> > > <data type="patches">
> > > <location href="repodata/patches.xml"/>
> > > <checksum type="sha">90ac427749079973d044a9398d6749f5f008</checksum>
> > > <timestamp>1144088097</timestamp>
> > > <open-checksum type="sha">90ac4044a9398d6749f5f008</open-checksum>
> > > </data>
> >
> > I think there is a slight difference between "SHA" and "SHA-1" ;-)
>
> Checksums that have the type="sha" (as opposed to "md5" in repomd files are
> SHA-1 checksums. They do not use the original (now considered insecure) SHA.
What I mean to say is: Shouldn't ``type="sha1"'' be used instead?
Regards,
Ulrich
P.S. Unable to get any mirror server for 10.0 YOU for several minutes here. Known
problem?
[...]
Thanks for explaining. I did not consider a "split installation" (local boot with
remote repository).
> > > <data type="patches">
> > > <location href="repodata/patches.xml"/>
> > > <checksum type="sha">90ac427749079973d044a9398d6749f5f008</checksum>
> > > <timestamp>1144088097</timestamp>
> > > <open-checksum type="sha">90ac4044a9398d6749f5f008</open-checksum>
> > > </data>
> >
> > I think there is a slight difference between "SHA" and "SHA-1" ;-)
>
> Checksums that have the type="sha" (as opposed to "md5" in repomd files are
> SHA-1 checksums. They do not use the original (now considered insecure) SHA.
What I mean to say is: Shouldn't ``type="sha1"'' be used instead?
Regards,
Ulrich
P.S. Unable to get any mirror server for 10.0 YOU for several minutes here. Known
problem?
| < Previous | Next > |