| 1 |
On Wed, 2022-02-09 at 14:32 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 06:09:55PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> *snip* |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > This would: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > 1) break Gentoo installations behind restrictive firewalls, |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Maybe, maybe not. If the go module cache is populated on the firewalled |
| 11 |
> system ahead of time things would still work. could emerge -f handle |
| 12 |
> this? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> > 2) make parallel fetching much harder, |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I do not have any comments on this. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> > 3) would require custom implementations to support caching |
| 19 |
> > and mirroring, |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Go already handles both of these with the go proxy mirrors and the |
| 22 |
> GOMODCACHE environment variable. |
| 23 |
> We could, in the go-module eclass, point GOMODCACHE to for example |
| 24 |
> <distdir>/go-mod. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
So basically every sysadmin running Gentoo will now have to account for |
| 27 |
special case of fetching Go sources in addition to fetching generic |
| 28 |
Gentoo distfiles. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> > 4) will eventually lead to ebuilds fetching and using unverified data. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Not for go at least. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
And how are you going to guarantee that this humongous security hole |
| 36 |
will not be used wrong for anything else? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Best regards, |
| 40 |
Michał Górny |
Archives