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

Re: Bug#826043: apt: gpg validation fails on hurd



Hi,

(purely optional mail follows)

On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 11:21:41AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 02:25:45PM +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 01:13 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > From what you've explained, this bug should be reassigned to APT then ?
> 
> It has been filed on apt and never been assigned elsewhere.
> And, David already fixed it in git, tagging the bug +pending.
> He responded[1] only to 826043-submitter (ie, me and the bug docket)
> without CC:ing debian-hurd@l.d.o.  Which I'm hereby doing.

[Not sure I would have included d-hurd@ even if I had manually replied
(but I thought buglog & commit message [1] will be enough text already
and hadn't really anything to add) mainly as this isn't really hurd
specific, just easier to 'see' as a problem as on hurd it actually fails
while on linux it 'just' generates a warning which is hidden in the 'apt
update' case, but manual usage of apt-key should have made them visible
(sometimes at least). That also means I haven't actually tested it on
hurd, so if anyone wants to… testers are always welcome!]


btw: I just checked: I introduced the first of the two finds (which is
the more obvious problem as that codepath is used more) on 7 Jul 2015
(25f27319) [the other is 6 Dec 2015], so that problem isn't recent but
lingers there since 1.1 and I have to wonder if something changed in
regards to this on hurd (or d-i) or if that really is some huge
Baader-Meinhof bias… [2]

(and I am bit surprised we had nobody on non-hurd complain about
'strange' messages being emitted while using apt-key – but perhaps that
just means nobody is using apt-key anymore… if only that were true…)


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

[1] The mail isn't even sent by me via a tool, but by a git hook:
https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/Git#Marking_closed_bugs_as_pending_in_BTS
[2] I have these "how on earth could we miss that for so long?!?"
moments quite often recently… which is another instance itself…

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: