-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 479
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
.NET assemblies are not strong named in the NuGet Package 0.12.3 #158
Comments
People still use strong naming? |
I am currently am but can swap to not using it if it is not going to be used going forward. |
Yes, strong naming is still used because it's still in the .NET framework assembly loader (verification), for instance my app build is now unexpectedly broken due to this error:
So it's a breaking change if you make SharpCompress unsigned all of a sudden, you should have better documented the change in the version history. |
When I was updating mine I had to go back to one of the 0.11.x series to get a strong named one. |
You're welcome to do pull requests to fix this. I don't have time. I accept pull requests all the time. I pick and choose what interests I can do with what little free time I get and strong naming is not an interest. Frankly, I believe strong naming is useless and shouldn't be used. |
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 |
Another request for it to be strong-named... to avoid the warning I'm getting depending on a non-SN assembly from a SN-one in Noda Time. (The one I'm using SharpCompress from has to be strong-named so that NodaTime.dll itself can be strong-named.) I understand the reasons why it's not useful, but there are basically legacy requirements here :( This should be a simple change though - I'll try to find time to create a PR for it. |
I'll happily accept a pull request for this. I was just slightly annoyed someone wanted me to do it and I didn't have time to figure it out. I have/had a key file I was using so I may switch it to that when you do the pull request. Thanks! |
One quick feasibility check first: are you still performing your release build on Windows? I've been bitten by Linux builds silently "open source signing" instead of full signing binaries. If you're doing a release build on Windows, it shouldn't be an issue. |
Yeah, the build is on AppVeyor just for the full .NET builds. Doing it locally is harder because I'm OS X only currently. Better fire up that VM. |
I apologise for being annoying. It was more that I thought that the strong naming had got lost during the upgrade of the VS project to a newer version. |
@kimnzl sorry, I wasn't directing that at you. I was just lamenting people asking for things when a PR could do it easily. Strong naming kind of did get lost because I changed the project type and it was annoying to figure out. |
Fixed here: #195 |
In the NuGet package all the assemblies in the 0.12.3 package are not strong named.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: