On 06/23/2013 01:19 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-06-22, o godz. 17:02:56
> ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" napisał(a):
>
>> On 6/20/13 2:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Doing test signatures won't cover all failures.
>>
>> Do you know an example? The only one I'm aware of is when a test
>> signature
Dnia 2013-06-22, o godz. 17:02:56
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" napisał(a):
> On 6/20/13 2:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Doing test signatures won't cover all failures.
>
> Do you know an example? The only one I'm aware of is when a test
> signature is made very close to the expiration date, and then t
On 6/20/13 2:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Doing test signatures won't cover all failures.
Do you know an example? The only one I'm aware of is when a test
signature is made very close to the expiration date, and then the real
signature would be done after it.
> IMHO the best thing to do would be
Dnia 2013-06-19, o godz. 19:59:08
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" napisał(a):
> I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES="sign" . I'm aware
> that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
> breakages, so if gpg fails it proceeds, but is there something it could
> do to check gp
On 06/20/2013 05:27 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 06/19/2013 08:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 06/19/2013 07:59 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>>> I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES="sign" . I'm aware
>>> that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
>>> breakages, s
On 06/19/2013 08:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 06/19/2013 07:59 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES="sign" . I'm aware
>> that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
>> breakages, so if gpg fails it proceeds, but is there somethi
On 06/19/2013 07:59 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> I was surprised by repoman just dropping FEATURES="sign" . I'm aware
> that at that time it has to commit an updated Manifest to prevent
> breakages, so if gpg fails it proceeds, but is there something it could
> do to check gpg sanity before com
Today an interesting thing happened to my repoman, as I was committing a
change:
>>> Creating Manifest for /home/ph/gentoo-x86/dev-lang/v8
gpg: no default secret key: Unusable secret key
gpg: /home/ph/gentoo-x86/dev-lang/v8/Manifest: clearsign failed:
Unusable secret key
!!! !!! gpg exited with '2
