On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/02/2017 04:09 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> I assure you I did test both patches. I leave as an exercise to you to >> show me what it breaks. >> >> Also, keeping "exercises" for contributors is not something which >> helps to gather more contributions. It solved the dnf install >> requirement for my test and seems to be the right thing to do. I may >> be missing something but please point it or give me a case test. > > > The first patch is removing the addition of 'repo_gpgcheck=1' option to dnf > config gile when repo feed signing/verification is enabled. Dnf does not > enable that feature by default, and so the option must be present in dnf > config file when repo feed signature verification is in use. > > The second patch adds 'gpgcheck=0' when repo feed signing is disabled, which > will also disable package verification at runtime, ignoring the altogether > different build setting controlling that. As I've already explained to you, > package signing and feed signing are two different things, with their own > sets of options. > > Test case 1: > > - enable feed signing, check that resulting dnf.conf file has feed > verification (repo_gpgcheck option) enabled > > Test case 2: > > - enable package signing, disable package feed signing, check that the > resulting dnf.conf file has package verification enabled. > > Both test cases will fail with your patches.
I sent a v2 making it clear it disabled package signature check. It works for my test case. I dropped the repo_gpgcheck removal patch. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
