dpkg-sig support wanted?

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt · *nix forums beginner Joined: 07 Apr 2005 Posts: 40

Heya,

Today (or last night, whatever), the dak installation on ftp-master was
changed to not accept packages that include more than 3 parts, which are
usually the binary version and the compressed control and data
tarballs. This means that signed binary packages are rejected.

This is not the first time that this change to the dak scripts was
activated. We had this problem for a few days some months ago, but the
change was reverted. There was no discussion about this issue (and why
signed binary packages need to be rejected) since then. There was no
warning or indication that this check would be activated again in the
last week.

As I'm responsible for most of dpkg-sig's code (and planned to do some
more work in the next two months) I'd like to know if anyone cares about
using these binary signatures or if I can invest my time into something
that's a bit more satisfying (== non-Debian stuff). As the ftp-masters
and the dpkg maintainers seem to have no interest in the whole thing,
I'm beginning to doubt that it's sensible to work on dpkg-sig.

Marc
--
Fachbegriffe der Informatik - Einfach erklärt
138: OSPF
One Single Point of Failure (Pascal Gienger)

James Vega · *nix forums beginner Joined: 21 May 2005 Posts: 16

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 05:41:05PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:

Petter Reinholdtsen · *nix forums Guru Wannabe Joined: 20 Feb 2005 Posts: 188

[Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt]

martin f krafft · *nix forums Guru Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 360

also sprach Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <he@debian.org> [2005.11.22.1650 +0100]:

John Hasler · *nix forums Guru Joined: 20 Feb 2005 Posts: 687

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt writes:

Matthew Palmer · *nix forums Guru Wannabe Joined: 20 Feb 2005 Posts: 146

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 04:50:02PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:

Brian May · *nix forums Guru Wannabe Joined: 27 Feb 2005 Posts: 109

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt · *nix forums beginner Joined: 07 Apr 2005 Posts: 40

Heya,

After discussing this in IRC, we agreed that I give a short overview
about the important stuff. As I'm quite lazy, I'm quoting James Troup
for the history bits:

<elmo> was written for Ubuntu, specifically because they were activating
data.tar.bz2 support in debs. as a side effect it also enforced
certain constraints on the layout of .ars simply becuase of the way the
code was written. this was tested on everything in ubuntu and didn't
trip anything. the code got ported to Debian shortly before the
release of sarge
<elmo> at that point, it became apparent it broke dpkg-sig signed debs.
after various conversations, I disabled the check, because amongst
other things making changes like that just prior to release probably
wasn't clever. however, I didn't sufficently comment WHY the check was
deactivated in the code, I just said "till sarge is released" or
similar
<elmo> which is my bad, and I apologize. in any event, sarge has
obviously been and gone, and the check got re-enabled as part of a
cleanup of the code on sphor vs. cvs.

Today, some people ranted in IRC about the fact that packages with
binary signatures were rejected again. As I believed that someone
activated these checks while knowing that they break packages with
binary signatures, I was pretty pissed off. I remembered the comment to
be something like "breaks dpkg-sig, deactivated for now", but the CVS [1]
shows that was wrong. Anyway, I want to apologize for carrying this to
-devel directly.

OK, now to the good parts: Joerg Jaspert planned to provide a better
version of the problematic check anyway (also validating the binary
signatures) and will try to finish them as soon as possible. I'll try to
be useful in respect to that, at least as useful as I can be. And now
we're all happy again. Yay!

Marc

Footnotes:
[1] http://cvs.debian.org/dak/jennifer?root=dak&r1=1.56&r2=1.57

--
BOFH #139:
UBNC (user brain not connected)

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt · *nix forums beginner Joined: 07 Apr 2005 Posts: 40

Brian May <bam@debian.org> writes:

Matthew Palmer · *nix forums Guru Wannabe Joined: 20 Feb 2005 Posts: 146

On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 10:29:32AM +1100, Brian May wrote:

Florian Weimer · *nix forums Guru Joined: 19 Feb 2005 Posts: 418

* Marc Brockschmidt:

Anthony Towns · *nix forums Guru Wannabe Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 274

On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 11:33:47AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:

Jeroen van Wolffelaar · *nix forums Guru Wannabe Joined: 06 Mar 2005 Posts: 144

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 04:50:02PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:

Marc Haber · *nix forums Guru Joined: 20 Feb 2005 Posts: 646

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:34:41 +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar
<jeroen@wolffelaar.nl> wrote:

Erinn Clark · *nix forums beginner Joined: 24 Sep 2005 Posts: 17

* Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de> [2005:11:23 18:40 +0100]:

Google