On 8/3/20 10:34 AM, Simon Matter via CentOS-devel wrote: >> On 8/3/20 9:43 AM, Antal Nemeš wrote: >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: CentOS-devel <centos-devel-bounces at centos.org> On Behalf Of Brian >>>> Stinson >>>> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2020 16:14 >>>>> I believe 14.3 is exactly the same as 14.2 except that RH needed to >>>>> adjust the signing order of their certificates and since those are RH >>>>> specific, 14.2 == 14.3 for the intents and purposes of non-RHEL >>>>> builds. >>>>> >>>>> Trevor >>>> >>>> This is the correct answer. The difference between 14.2 and 14.3 is >>>> only >>>> applicable to RHEL, and is not a change in the underlying content. The >>>> CentOS >>>> kernels were dual-signed in the right order for us in 14.2 >>>> >>>> >>>> --Brian >>> >>> Great, thanks for confirmation. This throws a gigantic monkey wrench in >>> my attempts >>> at automating src.rpm generation from git.centos.org, so I hope this was >>> an exceptional occurrence? >>> >> >> Yes .. one could say that an embargoed, 'named' sescureboot/kernel fix >> that requires a signature from Microsoft before release AND requires >> hiding embargoed content (which CentOS is not set up to do ..we build >> everythign in the open) .. is VERY MUCH an exceptional occurrence. > > Some filtering rules in my brain just triggered an alarm here, too many > words like 'embargoed content', 'secureboot', 'hiding', 'Microsoft'... on > a GNU/Linux devel list :-) You and me both .. :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 195 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200803/02b952fb/attachment-0006.sig>