Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change hashes to SRI format #176283

Closed
AndersonTorres opened this issue Jun 4, 2022 · 6 comments
Closed

Change hashes to SRI format #176283

AndersonTorres opened this issue Jun 4, 2022 · 6 comments

Comments

@AndersonTorres
Copy link
Member

AndersonTorres commented Jun 4, 2022

Issue description

The various hashes should be unified to the most recent SHA256 SRI format.

Steps to reproduce

A simple RG can find them. I have tried

rg 'sha256 = "(sha256:|)...................................................."' 

and found the files below:

http://ix.io/3Zoq

@elikoga
Copy link
Contributor

elikoga commented Jun 6, 2022

wondering: Would this cause a mass-rebuild?

@AndersonTorres
Copy link
Member Author

wondering: Would this cause a mass-rebuild?

Ideally not. Many of those packages are leaves.

The machine-generated can be problematic, however.

@milahu
Copy link
Contributor

milahu commented Sep 2, 2022

The various hashes should be unified to the most recent SHA256 SRI format.

why?

@AndersonTorres
Copy link
Member Author

why?

Because reasons.

@winterqt
Copy link
Member

winterqt commented Sep 3, 2022

Also see NixOS/rfcs#131.

@sternenseemann
Copy link
Member

I'm closing this since the RFC is still under discussion. It is (as of writing this) just a proposal and there hasn't even been a shepherd discussion yet. We should defer any (treewide) actions until we have come to a decision.

I specifically want to avoid a situation as with the version format RFC where facts were created in nixpkgs and it later turned out that the actions taken were not necessarily the way to go.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants