** Original comment by rdassen ** 3. What is the nature and description of the request? Add sha256sum to Anaconda runtime environment. 4. Why does the customer need this? (List the business requirements here): RPM signatures are now generated by sha256sum instead of md5sum. The Anaconda runtime environment does not include sha256sum, but does include md5sum. Without sha256sum, it is not possible to manually verify package signatures if there are package integrity problems in the Anaconda runtime environment. 5. How would the customer like to achieve this? (List the functional requirements here) Include the sha256sum command line utility in anaconda such that it is available in the shell during install. 6. For each functional requirement listed in question 5, specify how Red Hat and the customer can test to confirm the requirement is successfully implemented. Press ctrl-alt-f2 during an install to gain a shell prompt, run sha256sum <some.rpm> and a sha256 sum is returned. 7. Is there already an existing RFE upstream or in Red Hat bugzilla? No 8. Does the customer have any specific timeline dependencies? No. 9. Is the sales team involved in this request and do they have any additional input? No. 10. List any affected packages coreutils 11. Would the customer be able to assist in testing this functionality if implemented? Customer testing should not be necessary.
Patch posted.
pushed upstream 4bff56e69407e800504b5a1d6f6c8b7e920fec77
sha256sum is present in anaconda environment: [anaconda root@rtt7 root]# which sha256sum /usr/bin/sha256sum [anaconda root@rtt7 root]# dd if=/dev/zero bs=1M count=1 | sha256sum 1+0 records in 1+0 records out 1048576 bytes (1.0 MB) copied, 0.00927672 s, 113 MB/s 30e14955ebf1352266dc2ff8067e68104607e750abb9d3b36582b8af909fcb58 - [anaconda root@rtt7 root]# Tested on build RHEL6.4-20121206.0 with anaconda-13.21.187-1.el6. Moving to VERIFIED.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-0373.html