Re: Cryptic messages from installers
Filip Van Raemdonck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:35:42PM +0100, James Troup wrote: >> For a real world example: buildd uploads are signed by real >> maintainers but they do _not_ want either the upload queue or katie to >> mail them about the uploads; that mail needs to go to the Maintainer: >> field, i.e. the buildd so it can be processed. > >I thought the Changed-By: field was meant for the porters? No, Changed-By: is always the person who made the most recent changelog entry, for the benefit of NMUs. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cryptic messages from installers
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: > On 20010419T170915+0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > On 18 Apr 2001, James Troup wrote: > > > making broken assumptions based on random things like the signature on > > > the file. > > > > "A gpg signature is a random thing" --Debian gnupg maintainer. > > > > Great quote! :-) > > Except that it's not a quote (don't agree with me? show me where he > used those exact words). Of course it is not a quote, hence the ":-)". But this does not change what he said: "[...] based on random things like the signature on the file." Being a gpg signature the deliberate and internally consistent thing it is, the only context I can think of it to be "random" is the statistical distribution of the characters in its base64 enconding.
