You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Yes, I know we can use SigLevel = Optional, but I've been using Required, and I'm just wondering if unsigned packages should be reported as bugs, or in some other way, or not at all.
Offline
No need to report them. The transition will take time. ATM just a bit more than 30% of our packages are signed.
Offline
OK thanks.
When pacman4 hits core, should we then expect all packages to be signed?
Last edited by tomk (2011-10-19 07:15:17)
Offline
No, quite unlikely.
Offline
Just signing old packages is not really a great idea unless the relevant developer has the original package still on their system and can verify its integrity. So any package without a signature will need rebuilt, which will take a while...
Offline
Just signing old packages is not really a great idea unless the relevant developer has the original package still on their system and can verify its integrity. So any package without a signature will need rebuilt, which will take a while...
Would everyone then simply run with 'SigLevel = Optional *' for the near (and medium-term) future? Actually 'Optional TrustAll' for most of us.
Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.
Offline
Well, currently it is "Optional TrustAll". Hopefully soon we get a keyring sorted and it can be "Optional TrustedOnly" and then eventually "Required TrustedOnly" on a repo-by-repo basis once all packages in a repo are signed.
Offline
Pages: 1