On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Smartboy <smartboyathome@gmail.com>
wrote:> Just wondering, as a user, does this mean Pacman will now
complain if one> builds and installs unsigned packages from the AUR?
nope, pacman -U would work the same way.
>> Smartboy>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:>>> Hi all,>>>> as discussed all new packages have to be signed from now on. This mean>> that if you use a build server you have to download the package to>> create the signature. Also see>> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Signing_Packages>>>> A new version of devtools will follow soon.>>>> Greetings,>>>> Pierre>>>> -->> Pierre Schmitz, http://pierre-schmitz.com>>>
* * *
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Philipp Überbacher
<hollunder@lavabit.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Pierre Schmitz's message of 2011-11-01 15:40:53 +0100:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as discussed all new packages have to be signed from now on. This mean
>> that if you use a build server you have to download the package to
>> create the signature. Also see
>> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Signing_Packages
>>
>> A new version of devtools will follow soon.
>>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Pierre
>
> Did this go to the right list? Was it only meant for TUs? If neither,
> please elaborate.
>
> Philipp
>
>
> To: Public mailing list for Arch Linux development>*<arch-dev-public@archlinux.org>, "Discussion about the Arch User Repository>*(AUR)" <aur-general@archlinux.org>
--
Kwpolska <http://kwpolska.tk>
stop html mail * * *| always bottom-post
www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
GPG KEY: 5EAAEA16 * | Arch Linux x86_64, zsh, mutt, vim.
# vim:set textwidth=70:
FYI: New packages have to be signed
