[Bug 39859] WineHQ packages for wine-gecko and wine-mono

[wine-bugs at winehq.org]

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39859

--- Comment #7 from Austin English <austinenglish at gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Sebastian Lackner from comment #6)
> (In reply to Vincent Povirk from comment #5)
> > We could have Wine verify signatures, but instead we rely on a hardcoded
> > hash. I'm not sure https is even used.
> 
> Checking a hash is even more secure than relying on signatures, so I do not
> see any real disadvantage here, no matter if HTTPS is used or not.

Good point.

> I'm not really sure yet whats the best way to do this. It doesn't really
> belong into the Wine package itself, and we potentially need multiple
> versions for stable/devel/staging in the same repository. When only the
> version number is different, older packages might get purged after some time.

Mmm, good point. Perhaps have the gecko/mono package names match the 'branch'
name, e.g., wine-gecko-stable, wine-gecko-devel, wine-gecko-staging (not ideal,
I realize, but as long as they're in the same repo that may be the best
option). wine-gecko-staging may not be needed, at least until y'all start
patching gecko in addition to wine ;)

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.