[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla
From: |
Dustin Sallings |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Nov 2004 10:17:43 -0800 |
On Nov 15, 2004, at 3:45, Karel Gardas wrote:
Darcs' cons:
- darcs does not support patch signing (showstopper for me)
That's not *exactly* true. darcs does support having signed patches
on send when using the following flags:
--sign sign the patch with your gpg key
--sign-as=KEYID sign the patch with a given keyid
--sign-ssl=IDFILE sign the patch using openssl with a
given private key
...when you apply, you can use one of the following flags for
verification:
--verify=PUBRING verify that the patch was signed by a
key in PUBRING
--verify-ssl=KEYS verify using openSSL with authorized
keys from file 'KEYS'
While the signature isn't recorded in the patch itself or your working
tree (although the patch name includes the sha1), it can be validated
if you keep the source of the patch (i.e. an email archive if you're
using email for transport).
--
Dustin Sallings
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, lode . leroy, 2004/11/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Karel Gardas, 2004/11/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla,
Dustin Sallings <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Karel Gardas, 2004/11/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Jan Hudec, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Karel Gardas, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Jan Hudec, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Karel Gardas, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Alexey N. Solofnenko, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Charles Duffy, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Alexey N. Solofnenko, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Karel Gardas, 2004/11/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla, Andrew Suffield, 2004/11/16