LuKreme wrote on Tue, 9 Dec 2008 23:23:19 -0700:
> Ok, where in those directions are you supposed to find the keyid?
where the channel maintainer announces the channel and tells you how to
use it.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.cona
On 9-Dec-2008, at 23:11, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 10:54:23PM -0700, LuKreme wrote:
curl -o sa.gpg http://spamassassin.apache.org/updates/GPG.KEY
echo "24F434CE" >> gpg.keys
sa-update --import sa.gpg
echo "updates.spamassassin.org" >> channel.list
The three lines that
On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 10:54:23PM -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> >echo "24F434CE" >> gpg.keys
> >echo "6C6191E3" >> gpg.keys
> >echo "856AA88A" >> gpg.keys
>
> The three lines that are echo "HEXCODE" >> gpg.keys are the issue for
> me, I guess. Where do those numbers come from?
They're the keyids for
On 5-Sep-2008, at 15:32, mouss wrote:
curl -o sa.gpg http://spamassassin.apache.org/updates/GPG.KEY
echo "24F434CE" >> gpg.keys
sa-update --import sa.gpg
echo "updates.spamassassin.org" >> channel.list
curl -o jm.gpg http://yerp.org/rules/GPG.KEY
echo "6C6191E3" >> gpg.keys
sa-update --import jm
>> Hello, this is the sa-update program talking to you.
>> We've detected a problem.
>> You need to do
>> $ wget http://spamassassin.apache.org/updates/GPG.KEY
>> $ sa-update --import GPG.KEY
>> and then run sa-update again. Thank you.
DCWO> Patches welcome. Please keep in mind, when parsing the
On 06/09/2008 4:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes, I'm saying instead of just letting sa-update fail with the generic GNU
> message and GNU hyperlink, setting the user off on a PhD Thesis effort
> of trying to figure out what to do, instead just detect the problem and print
> out:
> --
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I'm saying instead of just letting sa-update fail with the generic
> GNU message and GNU hyperlink, setting the user off on a PhD Thesis
> effort
Wow. Hyperbole much?
--
Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "K" == Kelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
K> Pardon me for putting words in someone's mouth, but I got the
K> impression that the original poster's point was not to advocate
K> disabling signature checking, but to suggest that the error message
K> should be more useful.
Yes, I'm saying ins
SM wrote:
There is a reason the updates are signed. You can either try and figure
out the right way or you can wait for someone to compromise one of the
endpoints to deliver illegitimate updates.
Pardon me for putting words in someone's mouth, but I got the impression
that the original poste
At 14:10 05-09-2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You know, it is a 1000 times easier to just do
$ sa-update --nogpg
As it's 1000 times easier to disable the firewall to solve user issues.
than to try to figure our the right way from the messages that
surround "channel: GPG validat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You know, it is a 1000 times easier to just do
$ sa-update --nogpg
than to try to figure our the right way from the messages that
surround "channel: GPG validation failed, channel failed", or the
sa-update man page, or writing this group and asking what to do
On Sat, 6 Sep 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You know, it is a 1000 times easier to just do
$ sa-update --nogpg
than to try to figure our the right way from the messages that
surround "channel: GPG validation failed, channel failed", or the
sa-update man page, or writing this group
You know, it is a 1000 times easier to just do
$ sa-update --nogpg
than to try to figure our the right way from the messages that
surround "channel: GPG validation failed, channel failed", or the
sa-update man page, or writing this group and asking what to do. So
there, the result
13 matches
Mail list logo
