Closed #857.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/857#event-2667743446___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.o
Oh. We're not removing something that's in active use, I simply had no idea
people actually use that, I've never heard so much as a single word of anybody
using it until now.
Closing and back to drawing board, but clearly proposing removal was an
effective way to gain information. Thanks for th
(Except I think that code is still not used by dnf because it dates to the
PackageKit C vs yum Python days?)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/857#issuecommen
Also worth noting https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/issues/43
(libdnf auto-injects `/etc/pki/rpm-gpg`)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/857#is
Ideally we don't want to have to carry a revert to gain the functionality back
for the Yocto Project. Is there something else that can be done here other
than to remove the code, such as an option with with in the configuration to
allow it to continue to function as it does today?
--
You are
Yes this is actively used by the Yocto Project. It allows us to have a single
location in the system that contains all of the software keys, and can be
updated dynamically by authorized systems/components. Having to load keys
(manually) into the rpm database, makes it very difficult to support
(cc: @mhatle @kanavin)
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/857#issuecomment-535604121___
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-m
This is still actively used by the Yocto folks, especially Wind River, who
patches DNF to get rpm to do this when `gpgkey=` isn't specified while
`gpgcheck=1` is set.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://
This is basically an abandoned and forgotten development path from
11 years ago that arguably should've been removed long ago, and one
that has potential security implications and doesn't play well with
existing API users who rely on gpg-pubkey headers being in the rpmdb
(RhBug:1393586)
You can vie
