Re: Lack of detached signatures

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

 



On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:25:43PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> [1] This is a minor nit, and probably not worth breaking away from the
> way the rest of the world does it, but it is somewhat silly to sign the
> compressed data. I couldn't care less about the exact bytes in the
> compressed version; what I care about is the actual tar file. The
> compression is just a transport.

The worry I have is that many users don't check the GPG checksum files
as it is.  If they have to decompress the file, and then run gpg to
check the checksum, they might never get around to doing it.

That being said, I'm not sure I have a good solution.  One is to ship
the file without using detached signatures, and ship a foo.tar.gz.gpg
file, and force them to use GPG to unwrap the file before it can be
unpacked.  But users would yell and scream if we did that...

	       	     	   	    	   - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]