Buildroot Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] github tarball urls: http vs https
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 07:47:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <527742F3.6070405@mind.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAXf6LUsvpTG1-tNk5aWgR5qNgBYFu0h6a50VkrZ3r4YVviCxQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/11/13 19:04, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> Hi Jerzy, Arnout, all,
>
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Jerzy Grzegorek
> <jerzy.grzegorek@trzebnica.net> wrote:
> [..]
>>> Packages that are hosted on github and downloaded with the tarball
>>> method, can either have a http or https URL. It seems that a download
>>> from http is redirected to the corresponding https URL. To avoid such
>>> an unnecessary redirect, we could update all github .mk files to use
>>> https directly.
>>>
>>> I vaguely recall a discussion on the mailing list about this, but I
>>> don't know what the outcome was. Was there a problem using the https
>>> URLs with respect to certificates?
>>
>>
>> It was my proposal.
>> Please look here:
>> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2013-October/079209.html
>>
>
> Thanks for the link. However, besides a comment from Arnout, the
> discussion was more about the VERSION part rather than the URL itself.
>
> Arnout, in that thread you wrote:
> "Also you change the URL to https here. With the recent problems with
> https URLs that we've seen on the autobuilders recently, I wonder if this
> is a good idea?"

  First of all: I didn't realize that the http URL just redirects to an 
https URL. In that case, obviously, using the https URL is better.

>
> Could you clarify what problems you were talking about?

  IIRC, at some point there was a problem that a download site used a 
certificate signed by a recent CA that was not included in the 
autobuilder's trusted certificate list, so wget would not accept it. It 
was discussed that an option was to run wget with --no-check-certificate, 
but this would defeat the purpose of https so was rejected. Of course, 
using an http URL instead of an https has the same result.

  Regards,
  Arnout

-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-04  6:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-02 16:53 [Buildroot] github tarball urls: http vs https Thomas De Schampheleire
2013-11-02 17:47 ` Jerzy Grzegorek
2013-11-02 18:04   ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2013-11-04  6:47     ` Arnout Vandecappelle [this message]
2013-11-04  8:33       ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2013-11-04 21:28         ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-11-05  8:11           ` Thomas De Schampheleire

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=527742F3.6070405@mind.be \
    --to=arnout@mind.be \
    --cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox