Hi Daniel, On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 02:01:54PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote: > Hi Guido, > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:00:41PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 03:28:51PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote: > > > As pointed our on Tuesday it's time for a new release. I have tagged > > > the release candidate 1 in git and pushed signed tarball and rpms to > > > the usual place at: > > > > > > ftp://libvirt.org/libvirt/ > > > > > > Based on my limited testing this works just fine, but that's very limited > > > and doesn't test portability at all, so please give it a try ! > > > > I'm having trouble verifying the signature: > > > > $ gpg --verify libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.pgp libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > > gpg: Signature made Do 29 Okt 2015 07:41:52 CET > > gpg: using DSA key 0x4606B8A5DE95BC1F > > gpg: please do a --check-trustdb > > gpg: BAD signature from "Daniel Veillard (Red Hat work email) <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx>" [unknown] > > > > while verifying e.g. 1.2.20 works as expected. > > Hum, where is libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.pgp coming from ? I only uploaded > libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.asc ! It's the same file. Debian's uscan just renames it after download. > > that said indeed there is an issue with rc1 signing ... > > [root@libvirt libvirt]# gpg2 --keyserver hkp://pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys DE95BC1Fgpg: requesting key DE95BC1F from hkp server pgp.mit.edu > gpg: /root/.gnupg/trustdb.gpg: trustdb created > gpg: key DE95BC1F: public key "Daniel Veillard (Red Hat work email) <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx>" imported > gpg: no ultimately trusted keys found > gpg: Total number processed: 1 > gpg: imported: 1 > [root@libvirt libvirt]# gpg --verify libvirt-1.2.20.tar.gz.asc libvirt-1.2.20.tar.gz > gpg: Signature made Fri 02 Oct 2015 01:12:08 PM CEST using DSA key ID DE95BC1F > gpg: Good signature from "Daniel Veillard (Red Hat work email) <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx>" > gpg: aka "Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@xxxxxx>" > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > Primary key fingerprint: C744 15BA 7C9C 7F78 F02E 1DC3 4606 B8A5 DE95 BC1F > [root@libvirt libvirt]# gpg --verify libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.asc libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > gpg: Signature made Thu 29 Oct 2015 07:41:52 AM CET using DSA key ID DE95BC1F > gpg: BAD signature from "Daniel Veillard (Red Hat work email) <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx>" > [root@libvirt libvirt]# > > I verified, the libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.asc present on libvirt server is > the same that I have left in my working dir of the machine where I assembled > the release. > On the other hand libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz diverges > > thinkpad2:~/libvirt -> sha256sum libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > 3cc9f2882a145562ee41b8369a8c3d1cb0f383fe13c3e39ac923f712bf8614d0 libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > thinkpad2:~/libvirt -> > > and > > [root@libvirt libvirt]# sha256sum libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > 00cce64d4eb906f294921effab7b0128dbded46da614f9d88681abdb80af0ae2 libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > [root@libvirt libvirt]# > > I remember that I interrupted the rsync when pushing the release and restarted > it this may have introduced that divergence, I reuploaded the rc1: > > [root@libvirt libvirt]# sha256sum libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > 3cc9f2882a145562ee41b8369a8c3d1cb0f383fe13c3e39ac923f712bf8614d0 libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > [root@libvirt libvirt]# sha256sum libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.asc > 9bfb1fe53c5d1457d5bc6a4f7ce4661ad925210f9ab2708bd0c523accf16f5e5 libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.asc > [root@libvirt libvirt]# gpg --verify libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz.asc libvirt-1.2.21-rc1.tar.gz > gpg: Signature made Thu 29 Oct 2015 07:41:52 AM CET using DSA key ID DE95BC1F > gpg: Good signature from "Daniel Veillard (Red Hat work email) <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx>" > gpg: aka "Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@xxxxxx>" > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > Primary key fingerprint: C744 15BA 7C9C 7F78 F02E 1DC3 4606 B8A5 DE95 BC1F > [root@libvirt libvirt]# > > and that version is fine, Indeed. With the new tarball it verifies correctly. Thanks! Cheers, -- Guido > > thanks for the heads-up ! > > Daniel > > -- > Daniel Veillard | Open Source and Standards, Red Hat > veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ > http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ > -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list