[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Unable to fix my bugs -- Debian keyring -- vacation

Jonas Meurer <jonas@freesources.org> writes:

>> Thats a bad thing. You must be able to add new keys. They should be
>> properly signed like the ones needed for ID at NM stage, but then it
>> should be *no* problem to add. Then it is not a "weakening" of the web
>> of trust.
> Hu? Why do you want 2 keys in the debian keyring? What reasons do you
> have? It's senceless because one key is enough. And if your key doesn't
> work any longer, then revoke it.

Try fetching 0x1120d31b from one and then from another keyserver
(pgp.mit.edu, wwwkeys.de.pgp.net) and you see why i do not want to use
it in the future.
But i do not want to revoke it (sign works, and thats what needed for
Debian) until i have my 0x7e7b8ac9 in the keyring.
The 0x1120d31b can be deleted with the addition of the 0x7e7b8ac9, i
revoke it after it is added.
But if i revoke it before and keyring-maint is doing nothin i end up
beeing unable to do any work for Debian.

> The only problem is if you had no backup and no revoke certificate and
> removed your ~/.gnupg then.

Or if you are so stupid that you try something with gpg a pgp keyserver
does not like. My fault, yes.
But shit happens and one must be able to get a new key into the keyring.
(Applying the same rules as for new keys from new NMs of course).
A silent ignore or a general NO is bad and should not be there.

begin  OjE-ist-scheisse.txt
bye, Joerg                 Encrypted Mail preferred!
Registered Linux User #97793 @ http://counter.li.org

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: