Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 20:02:43 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
> > Florian Kulzer writes:
>
> [...]
>
> [ We are discussing about verifying the content of Debian DVDs. ]
>
> > > First you need to download the files which list these checksums:
> > >
> >
On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 20:02:43 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
> Florian Kulzer writes:
[...]
[ We are discussing about verifying the content of Debian DVDs. ]
> > First you need to download the files which list these checksums:
> >
> > wget
> > http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/4.0_r1/i386/i
Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [ Felix, I hope this message also helps with your problem. ]
>
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 16:22:06 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
> > Florian Kulzer writes:
> > > On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 21:02:41 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
> > >
> > > Did you try to remove
Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 04:22:06PM -0700, Carl Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > I haven't seen any place where aptitude shows any of that
> > information. It just shows me a warning such as:
> >
> > WARNING: This version of acpid
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 18:40:44 +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> [ Felix, I hope this message also helps with your problem. ]
Thank you.
The posting gave a full explanation of my observations and a strategy
for dealing with the (probably non-existent) problem.
Felix
--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 7
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 04:22:06PM -0700, Carl Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> I haven't seen any place where aptitude shows any of that
> information. It just shows me a warning such as:
>
> WARNING: This version of acpid is from an untrusted source!
>Installing th
[ Felix, I hope this message also helps with your problem. ]
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 16:22:06 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
> Florian Kulzer writes:
> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 21:02:41 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Did you try to remove all the DVD-related lines from your
> > /etc/apt/sources.
Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 21:02:41 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
>
> Did you try to remove all the DVD-related lines from your
> /etc/apt/sources.list, run "aptitude update" and then add the DVD(s)
> again using the "apt-cdrom" command? I think that should
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 21:55:17 +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 21:02:41 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
>> Is there some way to get the system to re-read the release file? I
>> installed the key after I upgradeed the system to etch, so all
>> packages on my DVDs show as being un
Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 09:02:41PM -0700, Carl Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > dpkg performs no key checking, at least on packages in the Debian
> > > archive. There was some exper
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 09:02:41PM -0700, Carl Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > dpkg performs no key checking, at least on packages in the Debian
> > archive. There was some experimental code to stick embedded signatures
> > into .de
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 21:02:41 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
> Daniel Burrows writes:
[...]
> > It shouldn't matter which frontend you use. All the major frontends
> > check the signature of the Release file when you download package lists
> > from the archive. The Release file contains a cryp
Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 05:37:51AM +, Felix Karpfen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > >> But How do you use the key(s) listed in "/etc/apt/trusted.gpg" to
> > >> authenticate the individual installed packages.
> > >
> > > Oh, dpkg autom
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 05:37:51AM +, Felix Karpfen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> >> But How do you use the key(s) listed in "/etc/apt/trusted.gpg" to
> >> authenticate the individual installed packages.
> >
> > Oh, dpkg automatically checks it for you when you use apt-get/aptitude
On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 17:32:20 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
(Edited)
>
> During etch in testing period, I recall several problems which
> errouneously made to report to be unsigned package.
Since gpg-signed packages is an "etch" innovation, it explains why I
had not encountered before the "warning" de
Hi,
First, missing md5sum values reported by debsums are normal.
Second, signed key feature is nice security feature but it was a new
feature. During etch in testing period, I recall several problems which
errouneously made to report to be unsigned package.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 09:25:39PM +0
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:29:28 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 09:25:39PM +, Felix Karpfen wrote:
>> How do you use the key(s) listed in "/etc/apt/trusted.gpg" to
>> authenticate the individual installed packages.
>
> sorry, beyond me. on my system it just works.
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:29:28 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 09:25:39PM +, Felix Karpfen wrote:
>> How do you use the key(s) listed in "/etc/apt/trusted.gpg" to
>> authenticate the individual installed packages.
>
> sorry, beyond me. on my system it just works.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 09:25:39PM +, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:15:53 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 09:17:59PM +, Felix Karpfen wrote:
> >>
> >> The fault is mine/my setup. My connection to the internet is slow;
> >> hence I am redu
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:15:53 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 09:17:59PM +, Felix Karpfen wrote:
>>
>> The fault is mine/my setup. My connection to the internet is slow;
>> hence I am reduced to using the DVDs for upgrades. Although I procured
>> the "official"
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 09:17:59PM +, Felix Karpfen wrote:
>
> The fault is mine/my setup. My connection to the internet is slow;
> hence I am reduced to using the DVDs for upgrades. Although I procured
> the "official" Etch DVD set from a supplier listed by Debian, there were
> numerous not
By diligent lurking on this NG, I read of and tried the following
routines:
1. "debsums_gen -l" - which gave the following output (first two
lines):
Checking for packages without md5sums list
aalib1 akode alsaplayer at base-config base-files bc bin86 binutils
and
2."# aptitude search '~i! ~M
22 matches
Mail list logo
