Hi, I'm adding gnupg maintainers in cc since they might have interesting tips for the implementation. Context: we need to replace apt-key add calls with dropping files under the appropriate names for extra repositories in a Debian Installer context. Julian Andres Klode <firstname.lastname@example.org> (2017-01-21): > > On 18.01.2017 17:43, Marga Manterola wrote: > > > For a long time it's been possible to preseed a local repository that > > > has it's own keyring. However, with the latest changes related to gpg > > > dependencies getting dropped in apt, this is no longer possible. > > > > > > I'm setting severity as serious as adviced by Julien Cristau on IRC. > > > With the current state of things, in order to install a local repository > > > with a keyring the user needs to somehow create a script that will put > > > the keyring in place before 60local runs, and not preseed the keyring at > > > all. If the keyring is preseeded, *the whole installation will fail* > > > because apt-key add fails which causes 60local to fail, which causes the > > > install base system step to fail. > > > > > > This is the offending code: > > > https://sources.debian.net/src/apt-setup/1:0.123/generators/60local/#L33 > > > > > > This is using the deprecated apt-key add functionality. From the > > > apt-key manpage: > > > > > > COMMANDS > > > add filename > > > (...) > > > Note: Instead of using this command a keyring should be > > > placed directly in the /etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/ directory with a > > > descriptive name and either "gpg" or "asc" as file extension. > > > > > > So, the right thing to do is to copy the file to the right path instead > > > of calling apt-key add with it. > > > > Does that mean that we actually have to infer (check using grep?) if the > > file is armored or not? I think `apt-key add' just dealt with whatever > > it got and put the key into the keyring using gpg's --import function. > > So it's a little unfortunate that we'd now need to know the format of > > what we need to put into the fragment directory. > > AFAIK. If it is armored, it must be called .asc, if not it must be > called .gpg. Armored files are supported since 1.4~beta1, that is, > starting with stretch and Ubuntu zesty. GPG might also support > unarmored content in .asc files (at least it does --unarmor with > an unarmored file). > > So, the answer is probably yes, but you could try out just > storing everything in .asc files and it might work (but that's > a bit ugly...). I've tested with a custom repository and a sid chroot, and results are as follows when only the said file has been added to trusted.gpg.d/: | C2B35520.asc with asc contents: OK | C2B35520.asc with gpg contents: KO | C2B35520.gpg with gpg contents: OK | C2B35520.gpg with asc contents: KO so I think we need to have some kind of autodetection code. gnupg maintainers: is grepping for “BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK” enough to decide between armored and non-armored? Or do you have any better solutions? KiBi.
Description: Digital signature