[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: 2013Q3 freeze pre-announcement
On 13/09/2013 15:30, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 15:27:18 +0200
> From: Pierre Pronchery <khorben%defora.org@localhost>
> When signing with "gpg", it requires an implementation (probably
> security/gnupg) to be installed and available. This may be problematic
> for bulk builds, because this binary would then need to be bootstrapped
> first in some way - without signing its package obviously.
> Why would security/gnupg be a problem for bulk builds any more than
> pkgtools/pbulk, net/rsync, &c.?
When signing is enabled, the first package built must be signed already.
If gnupg (or any other implementation) is not readily available on the
system, building and installing packages will therefore fail - blocking
the whole process.
Note that I am not familiar with the way bulk builds are implemented in
particular, so maybe this isn't a problem.
For my tests and in the case of EdgeBSD, I am bootstrapping an
unprivileged environment before triggering the actual build, just like
this script does:
Main Index |
Thread Index |