Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 03:24:15AM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 05:31:32PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Notably, a decent signature system (which we can implement now, and I
> > think we *are*) radically reduces the dependency on lots of other
> > computers.
>
> Yes, and avoiding binary uploads by maintainers can make the system a bit
> more transparently auditable.
Not to mention making it break a lot more.
Quit beating that horse, it's already been buried.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
Attachment:
pgpLh1gudJEhH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Reply to:
- References:
- [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <jfs@computer.org>
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org>
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
- Re: [RFH] The need for signed packages and signed Releases (long, long)
- From: Bernd Eckenfels <lists@lina.inka.de>