On May 28, 2007, at 9:27 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote:

>
> On May 28, 2007, at 8:55 PM, Olivier Thauvin wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> The whole specfile is not reasonnable in all binaries, because the  
>> size it
>> will need, the specfile is probably bigger than the whole header.
>>
>> But a 16 bytes length binary string is ok, and md5sum is enough to  
>> warranty a
>> the uniqness of the file in most of case.
>>
>> WDYT of this idea ?
>>
>
> I think its a good idea.
>

I do point out that a build driven by a srpm, rather than a spec  
file, already
has a digest from a signed header. Alas *.spec, not *.src.rpm, currently
drives a build.

73 de Jeff