Re: Bug#707006: [nik...@gmail.com: Live CD keys missing from key server]

2014-04-02 Thread Evgeny Kapun
03.04.2014 00:50, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > Public keyservers aren't expected to provide verification of key > authenticity. The signatures on the keys themselves do that. The Debian > Live CD key is signed by Daniel, whose key is then signed by many other > DDs (and present in the debian-keyring

Re: Bug#707006: [nik...@gmail.com: Live CD keys missing from key server]

2014-04-02 Thread Jonathan McDowell
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:01:38PM +0400, Evgeny Kapun wrote: > 02.04.2014 07:45, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > > I don't actually think it's appropriate that this key lives in the > > debian-role-keys keyring (and in general I think that keyring needs > > to go away). The key should be present on the

Re: Bug#707006: [nik...@gmail.com: Live CD keys missing from key server]

2014-04-02 Thread Daniel Baumann
On 04/02/2014 09:01 PM, Evgeny Kapun wrote: > Public keyserver network doesn't help in verifying key authenticity. checking the trust chain via the signature of my key that is in the debian keyring does. -- Address:Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern Email: daniel.bau

Bug#707006: Info received (Bug#707006: [nik...@gmail.com: Live CD keys missing from key server])

2014-04-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding this Bug report. This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message has been received. Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other interested parties for their attention; they will rep

Re: Bug#707006: [nik...@gmail.com: Live CD keys missing from key server]

2014-04-02 Thread Evgeny Kapun
02.04.2014 07:45, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > I don't actually think it's appropriate that this key lives in the > debian-role-keys keyring (and in general I think that keyring needs to > go away). The key should be present on the public keyserver network; > keyring.debian.org does not attempt to pr

Re: nicer option for enabling persistence than hexediting isolinux/live.cfg?

2014-04-02 Thread Daniel Reichelt
Hi, > I think there is a terminology mismatch here. I wanted to avoid building > or rebuilding ISO images entirely, I wanted to use the existing images. presuming your boot medium is an USB stick, instead of dd'ing the hybrid-iso to it you could partition/format it/make it bootable with syslinux

Re: nicer option for enabling persistence than hexediting isolinux/live.cfg?

2014-04-02 Thread Richard Nelson
Greetings, On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Richard Nelson wrote: > Greetings, > > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > >> On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 13:56 +0200, chals wrote: >> >> > That is fair enough but my guess is that rebuilding an iso image might >> > take longer or rather in

Re: nicer option for enabling persistence than hexediting isolinux/live.cfg?

2014-04-02 Thread Richard Nelson
Greetings, On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 13:56 +0200, chals wrote: > > > That is fair enough but my guess is that rebuilding an iso image might > > take longer or rather involve more manual work than building an image > > from scratch. The requirements

Re: nicer option for enabling persistence than hexediting isolinux/live.cfg?

2014-04-02 Thread Paul Wise
On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 13:56 +0200, chals wrote: > That is fair enough but my guess is that rebuilding an iso image might > take longer or rather involve more manual work than building an image > from scratch. The requirements for creating a build system are > relatively low. See, I think there is

Re: nicer option for enabling persistence than hexediting isolinux/live.cfg?

2014-04-02 Thread chals
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > > I could have just rebuilt the ISO but wanted to avoid that so hdd images > aren't useful because I would have to build them myself. > That is fair enough but my guess is that rebuilding an iso image might take longer or rather involve more manu