On Fri, 2 Sep 2022, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
Note: Sequoia currently uses Nettle on Fedora, but there is ongoing work to port it to Sequoia to OpenSSL:
I think this should be considered a blocker for changing gpg backends.
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2041#issuecomment-1219175000 Note2: There are lots of reasons to use Sequoia, but one user-visible reason is improved usability. When a user imports a certificate, Sequoia lints it and displays potential issues, or reasons why it can't be imported: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1974#issuecomment-1081779174 $ rpm --import peter-expired-backsig.pgp Certificate 251C20A67D942D45: Policy rejects subkey CB4F47D30C8C9CE1: Expired on 2020-05-08T05:11:51Z Certificate does not have any usable signing keys Whereas before rpm would just say: error: peter-expired-backsig.pgp: key 1 import failed.
That seems like a fairly minor point to change backends and crypto library for and could be something that can be fixed in the current backend as well? Of course if upstream rpm is moving, I think fedora should do so as well to keep in line with upstream, but to me that really does imply not using nettle but using openssl. Paul _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
