Summary: | Portage+Repoman GPG Signing Feedback - Minor tweaks needed | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Robin Johnson <robbat2> |
Component: | Repoman | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | ||
Severity: | major | CC: | cpushare, swegener |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Robin Johnson
2004-09-02 10:35:48 UTC
How did lock-none cause problems? There should be no write access whatsoever. The problem I was trying to solve was access violations due to non-priv'd access. Are you using userpriv? At first it tried to update the trustdb, then it was trying something else and just bailed obscurly. I admit I did upgrade gpg between then and now, and I can't reproduce any error during the check phase any more. OK, some comments from my side. When using gpg-agent (use-agent in gpg.conf) from app-crypt/newpg and gpg fails for some reason to contact the agent (e.g. agent died or has never been started) gpg will fall back to prompt for the keyphrase on the terminal. The Manifest gets signed, but gpg's return value will be != 0 and repoman will call gpg repeatedly and will fail every time. No chance to break this, ctrl+c doesn't work as it only kills the gpg process. control-z kill %1 is your friend until issues are resolved. *** Bug 152977 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** I'm going to review current portage for this shortly and see if we can fix/close it. (In reply to Robin Johnson from comment #6) > I'm going to review current portage for this shortly and see if we can > fix/close it. Any progress on this review? Thank you in advance. |