Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 5th May 2008 21:00 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 313167
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Locking still necessary
by brucecampbellite on Wed 7th May 2008 12:48
in reply to "RE[4]: Locking still necessary"
Or alternatively, the developer/maintainer or whoever does the bundling can simply use some sort of cryptographic key, which the installer uses to confirm the new bundle is indeed from the same source as the already installed bundle.
Basically, the problem you're trying to solve is intrinsic to any form of installation, not only the idea posted in this article, so whatever solutions exist already can be used without any need for centralised administration.
If I recall correctly, zero-install used some crypto-signing for something similar.




Member since:
2006-07-30
Maybe I just misunderstand what you say but aren't all these attributes together sort of an identifier?
So you could have two files with attributes
program=paint
vendor=ms
version=4.1
patch_level=127
...
and if they contained different binaries it would be a big problem. You could, of course, add mechanisms like checksumming the binaries and so on.
But then again you'd need a central server/group of servers that tell the user that a program with attributes x and y should have checksum z.
Am I missing something?