Deif

EDIT: Never mind, I used the signing profile arn and not the version arn

Trying to get code signing up and running on my Lambda functions. I have created a CSC and using the same AWS Signer profile I signed a layer zip stored in S3. My lambda function is configured using Node 14.x, as is my layer.

My layer zip structure is as follows:

/META_INF/aws_signer_signature_v1.0.SF
/nodejs/node_modules/...

When I try to add the signed layer version to the function I get the error:

Lambda cannot deploy the function. The function or layer might be signed using a signature that the client is not configured to accept. Check the provided signature for arn:aws:lambda:us-west-2:ACCOUNT_ID:

I have a simple mobile app with some useful functionality targetting X audience. I also developed an alternative mobile app that does the same thing but looks completely different and offers additional functionality for target audience Y. The main reason for this is because of a safe-guarding issue - the users of this second app must have a different icon and app display name on their home screen (essentially it's a decoy app).

Due to the fact that you can't change the app display name and it would be inappropriate for me to change the main app to have a different display name when most users don't need the decoy name.

But I can't get it through the review process. They are straight up rej

Apologies if this is a stupid question.

​

On the announcement it stated that 1/8th of the chain is kept and it's random. But surely it can't be random, it must ensure that the full chain is equally distributed, right? Or we could hypothetically end up with a small portion of the chain that only a few nodes have. Or is this not a concern?

If I have an API Gateway endpoint and I have stages A and B that both point to the same lambda function version, do they share concurrency?

​

Use case: I have a stage variable that lists a parameter store variable name that's different for each stage, I was wondering if I could store that variable in global and trust that it's separated by stage, or do I have to consider that stages A and B can execute the same container so the variable in global could be incorrect?

Came across this just now and was confused that the available runtimes had been reduced. 1

​ You now can specify your runtimes in the buildspec:

phases:
  install:
    runtime-versions:
      nodejs: 10

I guess the change helps AWS in provisioning.

I want to try out building a small form factor machine but it's really hard to find out the dimensions so I need some help figuring out the compatibility of the components.

• NZXT H400i
• Asus ROG Maximus XI Gene (Z390)
• 2.5 slot gpu

The main thing I want to find out is if the bottom downward facing pins on the mobo make things difficult for this case and also how much vertical space is left if a 2.5 pci slot gpu is put into the only available lane?

I'm looking at doing an air cooled micro atx build but I'm struggling on getting the exact dimensions for the Asus ROG Maximus XI Gene mobo as it has some strangely placed slots and pins. Has anyone fit these two together and how does it cope with GPUs with a vertical height of 2.5 PCI lanes? Also do the downward pointing pins at the bottom of the mobo cause any problems?

I've been trying to find out why Nuget was designed the way it has been but I can't find an answer in among the thousands of questions around assembly binding errors. Npm just downloads specific versions if it needs to for sub dependencies so that you don't have to worry if two libraries are using different versions of the same sub dependency, so why does Nuget force you to merge everything into a single assembly for all dependencies?

The effect I see from an upgrade perspective is that you have this lag effect on new versions of libraries where breaking changes will leave you waiting until all other dependencies have upgraded to the latest version too. Code projects also have to actively m

I was worried it wasn't going to make it.