Comment 2 for bug 1585913

Simon Quigley (tsimonq2) wrote :

Mark, so are you saying that *only* SHA3-384 should be supported? If so, why not more formats?

Also, currently my code supports this through the source-checksum tag:
 - Raw md5, sha256, and sha512 checksums (support for more formats in progress)
 - Location of a file that has a supported checksum format
 - A URL for a file that has a supported checksum format

Are you suggesting that instead of going through source-checksum, that I use digest instead?

I'm just curious at what you are getting at, Mark.