On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 6:57 AM Hyunchul Lee <hyc.lee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hello Sedat, > > For v1.0.3 and later releases, we can provide tar.xz tarballs, hashes > and detached signatures. > But is there a reason why hashes are required despite the signature? > > We will let you know when it's done. > Hi Hyunchul, thanks for your feedback and providing tar.xz tarballs. BTW, Debian uses tar.xz tarballs as default for their packages. Hashes are for me a way to check if my download was complete and correct. That is the normal way. To sign them, too. Some days ago I downloaded Grml ISO-image. For ISO-images I see you can verify your download via hashes (sha1, md5 or better sha256 or sha512). I had once a Red Hat ISO-Image which did not install correctly. Checking the ISO-Image via offered hashes revealed it was not complete/correct downloaded. That happened once in my life. I see another topic: In the Debian world we have now exfat-utils (exfat-fuse based) and no exfatprogs Debian package. Some days ago Linux v5.7 entered Debian/testing AMD64 - my preferred distro. It's still on my todo-list but I have not tested the kernel-side of exfat-fs implementation. As said I contacted the Debian maintainer via PM and he is thinking of taking the maintenance of exfatprogs. But he did not do a last decision. You happen to know what other Linux distributions do in this topic? Thanks. Regards, - Sedat - [0] https://grml.org/download/ [1] https://packages.debian.org/exfat-utils [2] https://packages.debian.org/exfat-fuse > Thanks. > > Regards, > Hyunchul > > 2020년 6월 30일 (화) 오후 7:16, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx>님이 작성: > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:17 AM Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi folk, > > > > > > We have released exfatprogs-1.0.3 version. > > > Any feedback is welcome!:) > > > > > > CHANGES : > > > * Rename label.exfat to tune.exfat. > > > * tune.exfat: change argument style(-l option for print level, > > > -L option for setting label) > > > * mkfs.exfat: harmonize set volume label option with tune.exfat. > > > > > > NEW FEATURES : > > > * Add man page. > > > > > > BUG FIXES : > > > * Fix the reported build warnings/errors. > > > * Add memset to clean garbage in allocation. > > > * Fix wrong volume label array size. > > > * Open a device using O_EXCL to avoid formatting it while it is mounted. > > > * Fix incomplete "make dist" generated tarball. > > > > > > The git tree is at: > > > https://github.com/exfatprogs/exfatprogs > > > > > > The tarballs can be found at: > > > https://github.com/exfatprogs/exfatprogs/releases/download/1.0.3/exfatprogs-1.0.3.tar.gz > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > thanks for the upgrade. > > > > Today, I contacted the Debian maintainer on how he wants to > > distinguish between exfat-utils vs. exfatprogs as Linux v5.7 entered > > Debian/unstable. > > > > When I looked at the release/tags page on github: > > > > Can you please offer tar.xz tarballs, please? > > Hashes? Like sha256sum > > Signing keys? (Signed tarballs?) > > > > Thanks. > > > > Regards, > > - Sedat -
