udf2457

@zuiderkwast Looking briefly at your CI, three initial observations: 1. It needs updating anyway because it looks like you're building against your 4 branch, not the current 7 one (`actions/checkout@v4`)...

@bbarani my plan was just a simple amendment of the current GitHub runner to build Debian binaries whilst everyone is waiting for https://github.com/orgs/valkey-io/discussions/391. However at the moment it looks like...

> You can't really run github actions locally Well, you can, its called a [self-hosted github runner](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/hosting-your-own-runners). 😉 But self-hosted runners are not viable for a zero-revenue open-source project. Also...

You're welcome @cclose. I am of course somewhat disappointed that I opened this in October 2023 and your comment suggests it has _still_ not been formally addressed via a fix....

I second this observation. Fails first update, ok the second time. I seem to recall reading on the Nitrokey forums there was a faulty batch built from "less than reliable"...

@sambonbonne Ah ok, all of mine are 2021... 😱

@robin-nitrokey FYI it happens in Nitrokey App 2 too.

@jku Agree specifically with your "common hash algorithm" point. Before opening this issue yesterday, I did look through the TUF spec and I was surprised there was no list of...

> in fact even the signing algorithms are just examples: no support is required IIRC Interestingly: >Implementing the [KEYTYPE](https://theupdateframework.github.io/specification/latest/#keytype)s and [SCHEME](https://theupdateframework.github.io/specification/latest/#scheme)s below is RECOMMENDED for all implementations, as this enables...

@roidelapluie any chance you could update the docs to reflect the existence of `http_headers` ? CTRL-F of [the docs](https://prometheus.io/docs/prometheus/latest/configuration/configuration/) yields zero results for `http_headers`