Hi, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Well, assuming .changes is not snake-oil, then why should in-deb sigs be called snake-oil? After all, according to you they essentially do the same job.
Not exactly. .changes files say that the archive should be changed. If the archive were to accept any signed .deb just because a developer signed it, that would be bad(tm).
Description: OpenPGP digital signature