Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] proj/portage:master commit in: bin/

[Zac Medico]

On 09/12/2011 10:30 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 09/12/2011 09:38 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 03:20:35AM +0000, Zac Medico wrote:
>>> commit:     677240f7b3db66bdcd403c214e5d3fa30e31a24a
>>> Author:     Zac Medico <zmedico <AT> gentoo <DOT> org>
>>> AuthorDate: Tue Sep 13 03:20:00 2011 +0000
>>> Commit:     Zac Medico <zmedico <AT> gentoo <DOT> org>
>>> CommitDate: Tue Sep 13 03:20:00 2011 +0000
>>> URL:        http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=677240f7
>>>
>>> repoman: don't sign thin manifests
>>>
>>> Thin manifests imply reliance on the VCS for file integrity,
>>> which implies that manifest signatures are not needed.
>>
>> This is only true after the VCS has signed commits.
>>
>> If the VCS does not have signed commits, then we should have this
>> signature.
>
> So, should we add the ability to set "signed-manifests = false" in
> metadata/layout.conf? I can imagine that people using thin-manifests
> typically don't want signed-manifests, since it tends the introduce
> merge conflicts like those that thin-manifests is supposed to avoid.

I've implemented "signed-manifests = false" here:

http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=9cb089047e10b300100e7bbdc4274ecf8866b0bb

-- 
Thanks,
Zac