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

Re: gnupg-doc of standard priority?

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 12:16:08PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 11:45, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 02:28:54AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > > gnupg itself is not really a requirement for most users it is there more
> > > because we developers need it for Debian itself.  
> > Is this where we invite people to trojan your Debian mirror, and
> > demonstrate gpg's utility for the average Debian user, btw?
> Sorry to jump in here, but gpg is *not* useful in terms of pkg
> management for the average user as long as debs are not auto-checked on
> install by dpkg.

Auto-checking by dpkg is overrated.

> (And this in turn, of course, is not going to happen
> until a properly defined trust infrastructure is in place, probably with
> a 'Debian master key' or something like that.)

It's in beta, and there was a thread just a few days ago pointing you
at the appropriate key and software to use.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''

Attachment: pgpCGHGTK9wNI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: