RC1, makeSUSEdvd, or my bad luck?
Just installed 10.1 RC1 from DVDs I made with latest and greatest
makeSUSEdvd and create_package_descr, and now I see these package
signing problems:
If I run online update in yast, I always get a popup about
this every time:
The GnuPG key 'A84EDAE89C800ACA (SuSE Package Signing Key
Op zaterdag 15 april 2006 02:41, schreef Tom Horsley:
Just installed 10.1 RC1 from DVDs I made with latest and greatest makeSUSEdvd and create_package_descr, and now I see these package signing problems:
If I run online update in yast, I always get a popup about this every time:
The GnuPG key 'A84EDAE89C800ACA (SuSE Package Signing Key
)' has been found. If I say import, or don't import, I still get the popup each time. Answering yes or no to this makes no difference, I get the same question again next time.
I did go through the list of package groups and check just about everything when I installed. Perhaps some package is incorrectly signed in the RC1 media? Perhaps my disk had a boo-boo on that file? Just wondering if anyone else has seen the problem.
Hard to find between all the other problems but yes: here the same. Azerion
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 08:41:18PM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
Just installed 10.1 RC1 from DVDs I made with latest and greatest makeSUSEdvd and create_package_descr, and now I see these package signing problems:
If I run online update in yast, I always get a popup about this every time:
The GnuPG key 'A84EDAE89C800ACA (SuSE Package Signing Key
)' has been found. If I say import, or don't import, I still get the popup each time.
On the other hand, if I run "Installation Source" from yast, I get this different signature popup every time:
File /var/lib/zypp/cache/0/DATA/content is signed with GnuPG key 'A84EDAE89C800ACA (SuSE Package Signing Key
)' but the integrity check failed. yadda, yadda, yadda... Install it anyway?
Answering yes or no to this makes no difference, I get the same question again next time.
I did go through the list of package groups and check just about everything when I installed. Perhaps some package is incorrectly signed in the RC1 media? Perhaps my disk had a boo-boo on that file? Just wondering if anyone else has seen the problem.
Same here. Most likely because of the fact that makeSUSEdvd edits the content file. It removes all ^KEY and ^META lines. It would be nice to have an option: "don't ask anymore" or if I would know what exactly to change, so that it still all works without any errors. I am however able to install software. houghi -- Nutze die Zeit. Sie ist das Kostbarste, was wir haben, denn es ist unwiederbringliche Lebenszeit. Leben ist aber mehr als Werk und Arbeit, und das Sein wichtiger als das Tun - Johannes Müller-Elmau
everything when I installed. Perhaps some package is incorrectly signed in the RC1 media? Perhaps my disk had a boo-boo on that file? Just wondering if anyone else has seen the problem.
Same here. Most likely because of the fact that makeSUSEdvd edits the content file. It removes all ^KEY and ^META lines.
It would be nice to have an option: "don't ask anymore" or if I would know what exactly to change, so that it still all works without any errors.
A very bad idea for any cryptorelated things. Information on how to sign stuff (even with your own keys!) will be forthcoming. Ciao, Marcus
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 09:25:54PM +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote:
everything when I installed. Perhaps some package is incorrectly signed in the RC1 media? Perhaps my disk had a boo-boo on that file? Just wondering if anyone else has seen the problem.
Same here. Most likely because of the fact that makeSUSEdvd edits the content file. It removes all ^KEY and ^META lines.
It would be nice to have an option: "don't ask anymore" or if I would know what exactly to change, so that it still all works without any errors.
A very bad idea for any cryptorelated things.
I understand that. I would prefer another solution as well.
Information on how to sign stuff (even with your own keys!) will be forthcoming.
I implied that with my second part of the last sentence: if I would know what exactly to change, so that it still all works without any errors. So here is the question directly: How can I do the signing in the makeSUSEdvd script in such a way that it behaves as if it were a SUSE ISO? houghi -- Nutze die Zeit. Sie ist das Kostbarste, was wir haben, denn es ist unwiederbringliche Lebenszeit. Leben ist aber mehr als Werk und Arbeit, und das Sein wichtiger als das Tun - Johannes Müller-Elmau
On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 21:55 +0200, houghi wrote:
So here is the question directly: How can I do the signing in the makeSUSEdvd script in such a way that it behaves as if it were a SUSE ISO?
Or an alternate question: How can we convince Novell to go ahead and release DVD images as well as CD images for the Betas? (After all, no beta testing is being done of the DVD packaging right now - if it is broke, you won't get it tested till the final is released on DVD).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tom Horsley wrote:
On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 21:55 +0200, houghi wrote:
So here is the question directly: How can I do the signing in the makeSUSEdvd script in such a way that it behaves as if it were a SUSE ISO?
Or an alternate question: How can we convince Novell to go ahead and release DVD images as well as CD images for the Betas?
Better try to convince the mirror admins. Has been discussed many times, not feasible because of mirror infrastructure problems. It would mean the mirrors need to serve another 5 ISOs + 1 or 2 DVD images. Means more cache memory needed. Means strong degradation of performance because of cache misses and more disk I/O, etc...
(After all, no beta testing is being done of the DVD packaging right now - if it is broke, you won't get it tested till the final is released on DVD).
Correct, but not much problems to expect there.
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\
participants (5)
-
Azerion
-
houghi
-
Marcus Meissner
-
Pascal Bleser
-
Tom Horsley