Re: Upstream Tarball Signature Files

Russ, On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > Paul Hardy writes: > > > Osamu: I did not mean just accept one format--I meant accept both ".asc" > > and ".sig" files for ".changes", ".dsc", and uscan files. I suppose all > > three manuals

Re: Upstream Tarball Signature Files

Paul Hardy writes: > Osamu: I did not mean just accept one format--I meant accept both ".asc" > and ".sig" files for ".changes", ".dsc", and uscan files. I suppose all > three manuals you mentioned could be modified to document this. > I had not brought this up until the

debsig-verify_0.17_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 00:25:11 +0200 Source: debsig-verify Binary: debsig-verify Architecture: source Version: 0.17 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Dpkg Developers

Processing of debsig-verify_0.17_amd64.changes

debsig-verify_0.17_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: debsig-verify_0.17.dsc debsig-verify_0.17.tar.xz debsig-verify_0.17_amd64.buildinfo Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)

Re: Upstream Tarball Signature Files

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Osamu Aoki wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:48:08AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > ... > > On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 20:26:41 -0700, Paul Hardy wrote: > > > Also, where signature files are desired, I think it would be > beneficial to > > >

Proposal: A new approach to differential debs

Hi everyone, (I CCed -devel and deity, but we probably should just discuss that on -dpkg) while breakfast here at DebConf, the topic of delta upgrades came up. I think delta debs are generally a thing we should aim to have, but debdelta is not the implementation we want: * It is not integrated