sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?
- Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 10:56:24 -0700
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 07:35:32PM +0200, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> >
> > The individual keys would still be binaries...so we'd now have lots of
> >
> > little binaries instead of one big one?
> >
>
> If big keyring is changed it is very difficult to check what was changed.
> How many keys was changed?
> How many keys was added/removed (intentionally/unintentionally)?
>
> If one individual key is changed it is easy to check for example really
> there is a new maintainer of wget.
>
Im pretty sure that whatever sends review emails is just a script, it
could be modified to notice if a file is a binary .gpg file and instead
of stopping there, diff the output of gpg --list-keys on the current and
previous version of the file. Same could be done with some scripting
glue over p4 describe on the client side.
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?
, (continued)
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Seth Alan Woolley, 08/19/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Arwed von Merkatz, 08/19/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?,
Ladislav Hagara, 08/19/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Seth Alan Woolley, 08/19/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 08/19/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Seth Alan Woolley, 08/19/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Eric Sandall, 08/19/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 08/19/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Seth Alan Woolley, 08/20/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Ladislav Hagara, 08/21/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] GPG keyring storage ?, Andrew, 08/21/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.