Re: rpm libuser-devel is not signed

[Mathieu Baudier <mbaudier@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Not updating is entirely sensible and sounds like the best default position.
> Installing a package you'd expect to be signed when it isn't signed should
> ring alarm bells.

I agree that my first answer was probably wrong, even with all
disclaimers and warnings.

I thought of a technical way (--nogpgcheck) to solve the issue,
whereas the right answer was definitely procedural (as you point out,
not updating, what I would have done on my own systems).

I apologize, but I did my best...

> Freedom includes being free to make poor decisions.

I fully agree with you.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos