 |
 |
Well, technically sort of. Alma is not based on any release that Redhat creates. So, it can be, in some repsects, very different. The whole crypto scheme was also invented by Redhat and I am skeptical that Alma faithfully duplicates it. That said, there are several issues with the "future" x509 requirements with respect to backward compatability. SHA1 is only one of them. To capture all the conflict yous should be setting the default to "legacy" which (at least in Redhat) adjust all the conflicts. So use update-crypto-policies --set LEGACY Now whether that works in Alma is a different question. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/2014#issuecomment-1565218808 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <[log in to unmask]> ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1