[aur-general] TU Application: Bruno Pagani

Bruno Pagani bruno.n.pagani at gmail.com
Sun Jan 8 15:42:16 UTC 2017

Le 07/01/2017 à 16:05, NicoHood a écrit :

> Hey Bruno,
> nice to hear that you want to join the great ArchLinux project as TU. I
> am aware the discussion period has not started yet, but I think its fine
> if I already give some feedback.

Hi Nico,

You’ve been very fast indeed, but the discussion period started right
after anyway. ;)

> I've checked your PKGBUILDs and I've noted a few thinks (which I also
> did wrong or sometimes forget). Those are mostly only concerning
> security aspects which I find important. If you followed the recent
> discussion you might have noticed that some people differ from this
> opinion. Please take it as a kind notice for you, use it if you wish :)
> * For github download .tar.gz is preferred over .zip in general if i am
> not wrong.

Assuming you refer to audiothumbs-frameworks and ring-kde, I wasn’t
aware GitHub was providing .tar.gz downloads for snapshots tarballs
(they are not provided in the UI), but I admit not having tried a simple
substitution of file extension, which indeed works. Strange lack of
curiosity from my part. I’ve fixed both of them, thanks!

> * Prefix your source download with: ${pkgname}-${pkgver}.tar.xz:: if you
> have a common SRCDIR. I also recently change to a common src dir, as too
> many packages blow my directories.

Can you please specify which package(s) you have in mind here? I’ve just
checked again and didn’t found any package where I don’t do this and
upstream tarball doesn’t follow this either.

> * You can use https for sourceforge downloads soon/now[1] (bs1770gain)

Yes, and that is already what I do. Maybe you’ve overlooked or are
talking of “Upstream URL” (in which case this doesn’t work).

> * Thanks for using sha256sums. You may want to use the even stronger
> sha512sums, as it does not hurt to use stronger hashes *duck*

Stronger is relative (they’re mathematically the sames, breaking one in
an applicable way probably means breaking both). Does not hurt too.
Everything has been said around this in this list some months ago, I’ll
not start that debate again. I’ll only provide sha512 if this is what
upstream provides or a new policy going that way is adopted by
ArchLinux, which currently isn’t the case AFAIK.

> * certbot-user: the gpg keys should have a comment with the owner of the
> trusted keys (as you did with exfalso, but with email)

Sure, fixed. :) I’ve also fixed it in scribus-devel where it has
apparently escaped your review. ;)

> * mpd-{sserver,}minimal uses a sha1sum. If its an upstream hash please
> contact them to use stronger hashes and include a stronger one as well.
> You can use multiple hashes in the PKGBUILD (as in weboob-headless).

Like most of my -light or -minimal packages, hashes are from the repo
package. When they are upstream ones too (KDE packages notably), I
verify them, but here it’s not the case AFAIK. Those packages also use a
PGP key, so I could remove the sum altogether as the wiki proposes. But
actually this is one almost valid use case where I agree on switching to
stronger checksum: packages being on AUR, and AUR being full of people
that don’t understand PGP and its support in makepkg, the use of
--skippgpcheck is probably frequent. Then, even if this is not a
behaviour to be encouraged, having a strong verified checksum here is
probably better for those users. I’ve thus switched them to sha256sums.
That way, people relying on PGP still get the full verification, while
people skipping it get a checksum that I’ve computed after PGP
verification of the same tarball.

> * powerdevil/spectacle-light uses http downloads. Even though gpg
> signatures are used, it would be nice to have https available anyways.
> It seems kde missconfigured their download subdomain for https, so you
> might want to contact them about that?

Yes, KDE doesn’t provides https at the moment. I’ve reported a bug
upstream[0] (failed to find any open or close one relating to this).

> * What I also do is to put my own GPG ID inside my PKGBUILDs, so people
> can simpler verify/find my key. Just as an idea.

What purpose does that serve (outside of cluttering the PKGBUILD)? My
fingerprint is already in my AUR account profile[1] for that matter.

> * For those projects who dont use GPG signatures yet, you might want to
> kindly contact them. I've written a script + instructions for using gpg
> along with a template to contact upstreams[2]. You might want to check
> it out.

And I don’t like it. Because (good) PGP is not easy, and PGP signatures
for the sake of PGP signatures are not a good idea. If you want to be
able to trust a sig, you need to trust the key and the behaviour of his
owner regarding PGP. And I won’t trust a sig issued by someone that only
did it to satisfy you, rather than deeply thought about it and its
implications. Also, automated is rarely a good idea when it comes to PGP.

> * If you want to move whipper, please consider to take part in the
> discussion about gpg[3]. Please dont take it personally, some people
> found them personally offended, while this was not the intention. You
> have the chance to also speak up for stronger security. I do not want to
> end this in an offtopic discussion, maybe you can help too ;)

Done. But as you might have expected since last paragraph, didn’t went
your way.


[0] https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374741
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/ArchangeGabriel/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 520 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20170108/8fce61ba/attachment.asc>

More information about the aur-general mailing list