On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 12:28 AM Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 06/11/2025 19:35, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 7:14 PM Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 06/11/2025 18:05, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 6:10 PM Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 06/11/2025 16:31, Dimitris Soumis wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> <snip/>
> >>>>
> >>>>> I am getting an error when trying to verify the release. I haven't 
> >>>>> looked
> >>>>> into it so I am posting it here in case something's missed and will come
> >>>>> back to it later.
> >>>> The verify-release task is broken. If you back-port the fixes from
> >>>> 11.0.x to build.xml it should work.
> >>>
> >>> This still doesn't completely work for me (at least not as good as I 
> >>> expect).
> >>> I get "apache-tomcat-11.0.14-src/build.xml:4461: Execute failed:
> >>> java.io.IOException: Cannot run program "C:/Program Files
> >>> (x86)/GnuPG/bin/gpg.exe"" (on Linux).
> >>> Unless I set a build.properties (after building of course, if you set
> >>> it before then it tries to sign).
> >>
> >> Odd.
> >>
> >> If you are building from the tag then you should be OK as the signing
> >> will use the sig files included in the tag.
> >
> > This is not about the Windows signature, it's for gpg signing. If gpg
> > is available, then "ant release" prompts for my key password, and if
> > it's not available then "ant verify-release" does not work.
>
> Got it. Sorry. That looks like another side-effect of this change:
>
> https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/6abcfa58e0bbc55d4c64f8d72a4e707cb722a4ba
>
> I have gpg on the machines where I test builds so I didn't see that issue.

Is it ok if I introduce a second gpg path variable to avoid this
issue, like gpg.verify.exec=/path/to/gpg and maybe use a more "common"
default value there (for me it's obviously "/usr/bin/gpg").

Rémy

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to