On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 08:20:43 - (UTC)
Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2024-11-22, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> >
> > Which kind of default incompatibility is implemented in GnuPG 2.4?
>
> [...]
>
> LWN did an article in december about it.
Do you mean the schism article[
On Sat, 04 Jan 2025 08:42:10 +
Stephan Verbücheln wrote:
> Please note that GnuPG 2.2 is also end of life now.
>
> https://gnupg.org/download/index.html
GnuPG 2.4.7 is in experimental[1] but neither yet in sid[2] or trixie[3]
(where it is version 2.2.45-2 in both repositories). The trixie f
Hello.
Maybe this question belongs more to debian-devel than debian-user:
According to the repository format wiki page[1] there exists contents
indices files, e.g. in Debian bookworm main[2]. How are they generated?
Is there documentation in the Debian wiki? Some tool to support this?
I created
On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 21:06:34 +0200
Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 07:46:03PM +0100, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> >
> > I created a repository with reprepro, but this generates Release
> > and Packages files only, not the Contens-*.gz files. The content
>
Hello.
A lot of packages do default configuration in /etc/project.conf and
admin related stuff in /etc/project.d/whatsoever.conf to separate the
distribution part from local overrides.
Every now and then it might be useful to switch changes on and off. The
Debian apache2 package uses sites-availa
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 09:01:09 +0100
Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
> No: the expected default for systemd-managed services is to use
> /etc/$SERVICE/ .
Debian GNU/Systemd is only an unofficial
subdistribution of Debian GNU/Linux. YMMV
--
kind regards
Frank
pgp3MLhxRVRIo.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digita
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 18:03:06 +0900
Simon Richter wrote:
> On 12/19/24 16:17, Frank Guthausen wrote:
>
> > A lot of packages do default configuration in /etc/project.conf and
> > admin related stuff in /etc/project.d/whatsoever.conf to separate
> > the distribution p
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 11:00:03 +0100
Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 10:09 +0100, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> >
> > Debian GNU/Systemd is only an unofficial
> > subdistribution of Debian GNU/Linux. YMMV
>
> Please keep such messages to appropriate mailing list
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 02:05:30 -0800
Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> I'm talking about the "empty /etc" model here, which is why I'm trying
> to find a solution so that people who *want* the file-full-of-comments
> have it, without installing it for people who *don't* want it.
This sounds to be a reasona
> 1. The GnuPG upstream forked the OpenPGP standard into his own
>thing called LibrePGP, and GnuPG 2.4 implements that new thing
>and is by default incompatible with other OpenPGP implementations.
Which kind of default incompatibility is implemented in GnuPG 2.4?
kind regards
Frank
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:01:51 +0100
Andreas Metzler wrote:
>
> Afaik there is no /known/ blocker except for the
> libgnupg-interface-perl test error #1088155.
According to bug report[1] there are failed subtests in 2.4.6 but these
are not specified. What causes this failures and what needs to be d
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 09:34:37 +0100
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 27/01/2025 23:15, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> >
> >https://release.debian.org/trixie/freeze_policy.html
>
> Updated
Almost - there are still the first three TBAs in the 2nd table row.
--
kind regards
Frank
pgpFVLmM08Tzp.
On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 19:33:01 +0100
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> On 2025-01-10 Frank Guthausen wrote:
> >
> > Is this still a problem with GnuPG 2.4.7? Can this be adjusted by
> > changing default configuration in the Debian package? Does it need
> > a code patch?
>
On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 18:29:02 -0500
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Thu 2025-01-09 07:55:36 +0100, Stephan Verbücheln wrote:
> > GnuPG 2.4 was released in 2022, long before the LibrePGP schism. It
> > is generally not clear to me how the divergence from upstream is a
> > reason to favor 2.2 over 2.
14 matches
Mail list logo
