Andy Tai wrote: > Look, the patch is still under discussion. I am not ignoring the opinions of > everyone, especially > not Tom. The patch is not accepted yet; I indicated that I want the opinions > of people. The > current majority opinion does not favor the patch in the current form; and > anything Tom does not > like would be considered twice, if not three times or more. > > Andy
I think a nice change would be to rename it out of the way, so that we
can continue and build a real entry. And if we name it something like:
,,invalid-sig-1-<revision-id>
Then you can use
find $revlib -name ",,invalid-sig*"
To find anything that was invalid. (And remove it or investigate it.)
The number is an incremental counter, in case it happens multiple times.
I think that would satisfy the purists, who want to know that something
happened, and want to investigate it. And it helps people who just want
it to keep working.
Though long term, keeping some second form of identification, like a
hash to validate integrity would also be nice.
John
=:->
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
