Russ,
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> This isn't a debian-policy matter...
>
My thinking was it would be beneficial for Debian Policy to suggest (but
not require) use of upstream OpenPGP signatures when available, because
such signature file use will help e
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> We do when the binary sig is small enough to be stored along with the
> inode, instead of requiring an entire filesystem block (4KiB), and the
> armored signature is not small enough for that :-( Of course, this
> really depends a lot on the filesystem, etc.
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> > On Sun, 13 Aug 2017, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> it can't just move the file -- it has to ASCII-armor it. But still, I
> >> think that's the right thing for the tools to do, not add another file.
> >> (The ASCII forma
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was
spwhit...@spwhitton.name).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currentl
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> On Sun, 13 Aug 2017, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> it can't just move the file -- it has to ASCII-armor it. But still, I
>> think that's the right thing for the tools to do, not add another file.
>> (The ASCII format is completely equivalent to the binary format; t
On Sun, 13 Aug 2017, Russ Allbery wrote:
> it can't just move the file -- it has to ASCII-armor it. But still, I
> think that's the right thing for the tools to do, not add another file.
> (The ASCII format is completely equivalent to the binary format; the
> conversion shouldn't lose or change an
6 matches
Mail list logo
