-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 172
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
Added codesign and resources #1069
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
- for Windows: rehlds/.github#30 and rehlds/.github#29 - for Linux: rehlds/.github#28
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for this functionality!
I need some time (I will gradually review this PR ) to look at this PR in detail.
You can immediately see the violation of the declarative component of the .yml
file.
runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
runs-on: ubuntu-24.04 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is this necessary in this PR?
ubuntu-latest
- It is a tag, and it will automatically update to the system we need.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
just -latest tag leads to an outdated version. if you specify 24, then it is a little newer and it is also LTS
it is not critical. i could roll-back it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I heard that GitHub is planning to move ubuntu-latest to ubuntu-24.04 early next year or so.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yep, and i think it very slow to wait. why not to update to next LTS now? it stable.
Tonight I will update PR. Do not merge it yet please. Tip We collectively came to the conclusion that signing each file inside the archive with .asc files is a bit redundant. For now, we'll just leave the signatures of the final archive and the native Windows ones. |
- name: Get rcedit from chocolatey | ||
run: | | ||
choco install rcedit -y | ||
shell: "pwsh" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
shell: "pwsh" |
AFAIK, there is no need to use the pwsh
shell. Standard Git Bash is fully suitable for the tasks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
a im not trust to git bash console at windows. PowerShell is more native.
Added signing of windows binaries, resolves Add signing of windows binaries .github#30
Added resource metainfo to windows binaries, resolves Add resource metainfo to windows binaries .github#29
Added signing for linux binaries, resolves Add signing for linux binaries .github#28
Caution
This is
infrastructure
update! NO code and NO bugfixes was implemented atReHLDS
at this PR.Also, I know that we have .rc files that are used to create binaries.
The problem is that we have not yet fully decided how their future will develop from a development point of view. Also, now there are only 2 .rc files that are built into hlds.exe and hltv.exe. All other dlls are built naked, which excites antiviruses.
For now, I have chosen to use rcedit, written by the Electron project, which can successfully read and edit resources in compiled files. Which is what I am actually doing.
For now, I suggest leaving it as is. To launch the mechanism. And optimize it in subsequent iterations of development, to move the progress forward a little.