@bobafett
The signatures are a nice feature for ensuring that the package is
valid. It doesn't have to be totally 'secure' as it is a private
internal network.
If you go back and read ALL of the comments, I think you'll note that
I'm not requesting that things are made less secure, but that
It is people like you that make novices hate computers. You get all
uptight about stupid security restrictions and then go on a random
diatribe on an issue that is more than a year old and is marked as
'invalid'. This is exactly why Linux will never be a desktop os for the
masses.
Anyway, my
Please re-open. Per the original report and the discussion, this isn't a
bug in gnupg, it is a bug in Ubuntu.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/706011
Title:
gpg --key-gen doesn't have
Wow Marc, I'm not going to repeat the discussion above, but clearly you
haven't read it.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/706011
Title:
gpg --key-gen doesn't have enough entropy and
No. It is an internal corporate repo sitting behind a firewall. In my eyes,
the only point of creating the key and signing the packages is so that
apt-get/aptitude doesn't cry like a baby (require me to type 'Yes') when I'm
installing software on the servers.
Anyway, way to miss the whole point
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: gnupg
Description:Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS
Release:10.04
If you install gpg and then type: gpg --gen-key, it 'freezes up' during the
entropy gathering phase.
We need to generate a lot of random bytes. It is a good idea to perform
some
Wow, I feel like there is a lot of hostility in these responses. Is that
really necessary?
I'm sorry, but I've tried this on both a vmware esx server instance and
a VM (in VMware Fusion) on my local desktop in a shell window. In both
cases, the result was the same. I let it sit for *hours* and
