On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) <zeeshanak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 04:54:09AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >>> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Some OS vendors recommend or require device drivers to be signed by them >>> before these device drivers could be installed on their OS. This >>> recommendation/requirement then also applies to the installer scripts of >>> that particular OS. >> >> Do we need to expose this to osinfo users as you added a magic workaround >> for the signing requirement ? > > I think we'll need this for win7 if we don't manage to find a similar > magic for it. Lets have the API in place already for that. Thinking more about this and the driver format API, I realized that unlike driver format API not having this already in place could break things for apps later. E.g Right now Boxes installs every postinstall driver we list under the OS, provided any of its scripts support postinstall drivers. So if/when we add handling of postinstall drivers in an install script that can't handle unsigned drivers, Boxes will install these unsigned drivers. While in case of incompatible formats, drivers simply get ignored, unattended install will break in this case. So I suggest we add these signature related APIs so that apps (currently only Boxes afaik) can already use it to setup proper checks in place. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
