On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 03:51:01PM +0200, Stephan Sürken wrote:
> Btw, it's only now that I actually grasp your initial problem was about
> entropy all along ;). I just blatantly assumed your initial bug report
> was about the doctest failing due to GPG 2.1 (which it did at the time,
> entropy or
Hi Santiago,
On Mo, 2016-09-12 at 21:34 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
(...)
> > Lastly, one other option for gnupg at least is to patch upstream to
> > use
> > --debug-quick-random in the build-time test.
> >
> > do any of these options sound more appealing than the others?
> I didn't know about
Rehi,
On Mo, 2016-09-12 at 21:34 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 07:34:09PM +0200, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>
> >
> > An even easier approach might be to do the following within the
> > build:
> >
> > * ln -sf /dev/urandom /dev/random
> >
> > why would we need the
Hi Daniel, Santiago,
thx for the answer; I am not 100% satisfied, though ;).
For me, it actually boils down to what notion we have:
(1) The builder hosts must provide reasonable entropy.
(2) Software testsuites generally must work fine even with low entropy.
In the past, I tended to go with
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 07:34:09PM +0200, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> An even easier approach might be to do the following within the build:
>
> * ln -sf /dev/urandom /dev/random
>
> why would we need the blocking kernel RNG in the buildd anyway?
Either that, or maybe a build-depends on a
Hi Santiago and all--
On Sun 2016-09-11 21:30:22 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Well, maybe the problem has always been there.
>
> Maybe official autobuilders have a lot of entropy and we have never
> found the problem there, but IMHO we should not take that for granted
> in the general case.
I
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 07:40:31PM +0200, Stephan Sürken wrote:
> > The error message:
> (...)
> > suggests to me that there is not enough entropy to generate a key.
>
> If entropy actually is the problem, it should have always been there
> for all 1.0.x versions (having that doctest).
Well,
Hi Santiago,
On So, 2016-09-11 at 11:37 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
(...)
> This is the changelog entry you wrote:
>
> > * [8ee94bc] gnupg.py: Add extra method to get sec user id. Fixes
> doctest
> > for GPG 2.1. Thanks to Santiago Vila (Closes: 834683)
>
> If this is only intended to
found 834683 1.0.17
thanks
Hi. Sorry for the reopening but this is still happening in testing,
where gnupg is still gnupg version 1.
This is the changelog entry you wrote:
>* [8ee94bc] gnupg.py: Add extra method to get sec user id. Fixes doctest
> for GPG 2.1. Thanks to Santiago Vila
9 matches
Mail list logo
