Dnia 2013-06-22, o godz. 17:02:56
Paweł Hajdan, Jr. phajdan...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On 6/20/13 2:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Doing test signatures won't cover all failures.
Do you know an example? The only one I'm aware of is when a test
signature is made very close to the expiration
On 06/23/2013 01:19 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2013-06-22, o godz. 17:02:56
Paweł Hajdan, Jr. phajdan...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On 6/20/13 2:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Doing test signatures won't cover all failures.
Do you know an example? The only one I'm aware of is when a test
On 6/20/13 2:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Doing test signatures won't cover all failures.
Do you know an example? The only one I'm aware of is when a test
signature is made very close to the expiration date, and then the real
signature would be done after it.
IMHO the best thing to do would be
On 06/20/2013 05:27 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 06/19/2013 08:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 06/19/2013 07:59 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES=sign . I'm aware
that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
breakages, so if gpg fails
Dnia 2013-06-19, o godz. 19:59:08
Paweł Hajdan, Jr. phajdan...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES=sign . I'm aware
that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
breakages, so if gpg fails it proceeds, but is there something it could
do
On 06/19/2013 07:59 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES=sign . I'm aware
that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
breakages, so if gpg fails it proceeds, but is there something it could
do to check gpg sanity before committing
On 06/19/2013 08:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 06/19/2013 07:59 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES=sign . I'm aware
that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
breakages, so if gpg fails it proceeds, but is there something it
