On 05/02/15 22:17, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> On 05.02.2015 21:59, Freddie Chopin wrote:
>> On 02/05/2015 08:49 PM, Michael Schwingen wrote:
>>> For this to be true, the checksums would have to come from a different
>>> source. If someone can modify the binary on your webserver, he could
>>> also
On 02/05/2015 10:17 PM, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> Now if you had included the MD5-sums of the files in your mail, we
> would have had an independent channel for verification.
This is indeed a very good idea (;
Below I include MD5 checksums of all packages that I have ever produced.
I've also c
On 05.02.2015 21:59, Freddie Chopin wrote:
> On 02/05/2015 08:49 PM, Michael Schwingen wrote:
>> For this to be true, the checksums would have to come from a different
>> source. If someone can modify the binary on your webserver, he could
>> also modify the md5sum files. cu Michael
> The MD5 che
On 02/05/2015 08:49 PM, Michael Schwingen wrote:
> For this to be true, the checksums would have to come from a different
> source. If someone can modify the binary on your webserver, he could
> also modify the md5sum files. cu Michael
The MD5 checksums are visible on the website and I verified
On 05.02.2015 10:00, Freddie Chopin wrote:
> If the md5 checksum of the package matches the info from the download
> section, then the packages were NOT tampered with.
For this to be true, the checksums would have to come from a different
source.
If someone can modify the binary on your webserver
I checked stlink_usb.c in gdb and the problem is apparently in ST-Link.
It probably starts one extra memory read with incremented TAR.
What is really annoying that error is hidden till the next memory read
(or perhaps write).
stlink_usb_read_mem() should retry once if it gets status code 0x15.
To
Hello!
Yesterday one visitor of my website (who intended to use my OpenOCD
binaries) informed my that his virus scanner flagged the latest 32-bit
Windows binary of OpenOCD (development version from November) as
infected with malware.
It turns out that indeed some scanners detect malware or tro
On 04 Feb 2015, at 23:58, Andreas Fritiofson
wrote:
> Then it's PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR you want.
On 05 Feb 2015, at 00:35, Liviu Ionescu wrote:
> I'll check the difference between PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR and PKG_CONFIG_DIR and
> come back to you with the result.
I checked the pkg-config source code a
On 05/02/15 08:09, Paul Fertser wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 10:44:47PM -0800, Pink Boy wrote:
>>> Well, so far this is wishful thinking, currently the procedure is quite
>>> complicated, especially the libraries.
>>
>> That says not so nice things about the codebase and build system.
>
> MSYS
