GNU bug report logs - #17625
details of package signing mechanism

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Ted Zlatanov <tzz <at> lifelogs.com>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: Daiki Ueno <ueno <at> gnu.org>, 17625 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#17625: 24.4.50; All installed packages marked "unsigned", no archive listed
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 10:29:01 -0400

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 09:35:34 -0400 Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> wrote: 

>>> 1- why have `package-desc-signed' (and the foo.signed files)?  I don't
>>> think APT has such a feature and I'm wondering what would be
>>> the interest.
>> I remember it was exactly for displaying signed/unsigned status on the
>> list, requested by Ted:
>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2013-10/msg00033.html
>> I'm not sure if it is useful at this point.

SM> Ted, do you remember why you wanted the "unsigned status" displayed in
SM> the package list?
SM> I can't think of a use-case where it's helpful.

I think it's helpful to indicate if packages are signed--unless they
must be signed by default, which is currently not the case.

Ted

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.