Ok, my mistake - I have only signed src rpms ;( My bad - apologies for wasting your time. Now, with the key - I can really figure out what's going on here. The key seems to be fine, yet rpm --checksig isn't happy about it. I've re-imported the key as you suggested, yet ir complains that the key is missing during the validation phase. I want to get to the bottom of it, but at least we have the packages signed now (the upload should be over in about an hour, I hope).
Thanks, Cos On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 01:31AM, Evans Ye wrote: > Hi Cos, > > I've verified deb repos, and they're good as what you said, however, it > seems that rpms are still not being signed. I don't have too much knowledge > on this so I did my homework and conduct the following evaluation. > Here's my evaluation steps, please advise if any thing incorrect: > > First, download a rpm from S3, which should be already signed: > > $ wget > http://bigtop.s3.amazonaws.com/releases/1.0.0/centos/6/x86_64/bigtop-utils/noarch/bigtop-utils-1.0.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm > $ rpm --checksig bigtop-utils/noarch/bigtop-utils-1.0.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm > bigtop-utils-1.0.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm.1: sha1 md5 OK > > As shown above, the rpm does not being signed. > A signed rpm should be looked like this: > > $ rpm --checksig puppetlabs-release-el-6.noarch.rpm > puppetlabs-release-el-6.noarch.rpm: rsa sha1 (md5) pgp md5 OK > > And after I signed the rpm by my key, the rpm looks good now: > > $ rpm --addsign bigtop-utils-1.0.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm > $ rpm --checksig bigtop-utils-1.0.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm > bigtop-utils-1.0.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm: rsa sha1 (md5) pgp md5 OK > > OTOH, it looks like the pgpkey for rpm packages needs to be armored when > exporting, for example: > > $ gpg --armor --output KEYS --export 'Evans Ye' > > Otherwise, an error occurs when importing a non-armored key: > > $ rpm --import https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/bigtop/KEYS > error: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/bigtop/KEYS: key 2 not an > armored public key. > > A good thing for that is we can fix it in the cloud. > Sorry for not discovering this at the very beginning. :( > > Evans > > > 2015-08-19 4:12 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>: > > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 02:12AM, Evans Ye wrote: > > > Well, sorry. When I do manually test on those repos, I got package is not > > > signed message... > > > It turns out that our puppet recipe sets pgpkey checking to false, which > > is > > > why I got things working without a problem. > > > I assume the repo should just work by dropping it into /etc/yum.repos.d/. > > > No need to import pgpkey manually, right? > > > > Hmm... with ubuntu repo the signatures are there because I had to run > > apt-addkey manually to make apt recognize the signatures. Otherwise, > > apt-get update didn't work. > > > > You might need to do something similar with yum - I am not really sure. > > But I > > am positive that I have signed the packages per the insructions on our > > release > > page. > > > > Cos > > > > > 2015-08-18 2:39 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > I think we are in good position - I was worries about keys being not > > found > > > > or > > > > something like this. If two of them are ok, then the rest should be > > fine > > > > too. > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for the confirmation and testing - really > > appreciate > > > > it! > > > > I will send the announcement shortly. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Cos > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 02:05AM, Evans Ye wrote: > > > > > We're so close to the finished line! Thank you everybody! > > > > > I took sometime to run the deployment test before I go to bed. > > > > > Specifically I've tested centos-6, debian-8 repo, both work like a > > charm. > > > > > It should be all good, if no hurry I'll do more test tomorrow. :) > > > > > > > > > > 2015-08-17 14:00 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > > > See? I can not even write word "dense" without making a typo... > > That's > > > > how > > > > > > hot > > > > > > it is. Anyway, I have uploaded all signed packages to s3 (oh boy, > > was > > > > it > > > > > > fun?), and updated the repo files in the release under > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/bigtop/bigtop-1.0.0/ > > > > > > > > > > > > If you have a cycle or two - please do some quick validation and I > > will > > > > > > send > > > > > > the announcement to make the release final. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks everyone > > > > > > Cos > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 03:18AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > > > > > > > Ah, of cource ... I am so sense when it's in the 100's F > > outside ;( > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:17PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Konstantin Boudnik < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Make sense - wgetting the stuff now. centos is done, debs and > > > > fedora > > > > > > to go. > > > > > > > > > Weirdly, deb repos are huge >2.5GB for whatever reason. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IIRC, this had to do with double caching of packages. IOW, you > > only > > > > > > > > need to make this available: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Releases/job/Bigtop-1.0.0-deb/BUILD_ENVIRONMENTS=debian-8,label=docker-slave-07/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/output/apt/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not the top level dir. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Roman. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
