<feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'>
<title>apt/test/integration/test-releasefile-verification, branch 1.4.2</title>
<subtitle>Debians commandline package manager</subtitle>
<id>https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=1.4.2</id>
<link rel='self' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/atom?h=1.4.2'/>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/'/>
<updated>2017-01-19T14:59:38Z</updated>
<entry>
<title>fix various typos reported by spellintian</title>
<updated>2017-01-19T14:59:38Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2017-01-19T14:14:19Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=93cff633a830e222693fc0f3d78e6e534d1126ee'/>
<id>urn:sha1:93cff633a830e222693fc0f3d78e6e534d1126ee</id>
<content type='text'>
Most of them in (old) code comments. The two instances of user visible
string changes the po files of the manpages are fixed up as well.

Gbp-Dch: Ignore
Reported-By: spellintian
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>show apt-key warnings in apt update</title>
<updated>2016-08-25T13:22:28Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-08-25T13:22:28Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=29c590951f812d9e9c4f17706e34f2c3315fb1f6'/>
<id>urn:sha1:29c590951f812d9e9c4f17706e34f2c3315fb1f6</id>
<content type='text'>
In 105503b4b470c124bc0c271bd8a50e25ecbe9133 we got a warning implemented
for unreadable files which greatly improves the behavior of apt update
already as everything will work as long as we don't need the keys
included in these files. The behavior if they are needed is still
strange through as update will fail claiming missing keys and a manual
test (which the user will likely perform as root) will be successful.

Passing the new warning generated by apt-key through to apt is a bit
strange from an interface point of view, but basically duplicating the
warning code in multiple places doesn't feel right either. That means we
have no translation for the message through as apt-key has no i18n yet.

It also means that if the user has a bunch of sources each of them will
generate a warning for each unreadable file which could result in quite
a few duplicated warnings, but "too many" is better than none.

Closes: 834973
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>add the gpg-classic variant to the gpgv/gnupg or-group</title>
<updated>2016-08-17T07:52:32Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-08-16T13:46:19Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=19fdf93d7363261227811a62157063081b9f1a5d'/>
<id>urn:sha1:19fdf93d7363261227811a62157063081b9f1a5d</id>
<content type='text'>
We need to support partial upgrades anyhow, so we have to deal with the
different versions and your tests try to ensure that we do, so we
shouldn't make any explicit higher requirements.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>don't sent Range requests if we know its not accepted</title>
<updated>2016-08-16T16:49:37Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-08-11T16:24:35Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=d94b1d80d8326334d17f6a43061368e783b8e0aa'/>
<id>urn:sha1:d94b1d80d8326334d17f6a43061368e783b8e0aa</id>
<content type='text'>
If the server told us in a previous request that it isn't supporting
Ranges with bytes via an Accept-Ranges header missing bytes, we don't
try to formulate requests using Ranges.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>(error) va_list 'args' was opened but not closed by va_end()</title>
<updated>2016-07-27T20:42:24Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-07-27T20:21:58Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=196d590a99e309764e07c9dc23ea98897eebf53a'/>
<id>urn:sha1:196d590a99e309764e07c9dc23ea98897eebf53a</id>
<content type='text'>
Reported-By: cppcheck
Gbp-Dch: Ignore
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>add insecure (and weak) allow-options for sources.list</title>
<updated>2016-06-22T12:05:01Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-06-20T18:50:43Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=d03b947b0ce4f87d7d5cc48d4d274ab3bd0b289a'/>
<id>urn:sha1:d03b947b0ce4f87d7d5cc48d4d274ab3bd0b289a</id>
<content type='text'>
Weak had no dedicated option before and Insecure and Downgrade were both
global options, which given the effect they all have on security is
rather bad. Setting them for individual repositories only isn't great
but at least slightly better and also more consistent with other
settings for repositories.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>tests: disable generation of Release.gpg by default</title>
<updated>2016-05-04T10:12:33Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-05-04T09:45:35Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=5a23c56d6852a27d45c2ae227b43060f7beac051'/>
<id>urn:sha1:5a23c56d6852a27d45c2ae227b43060f7beac051</id>
<content type='text'>
Most tests just need a signed repository and don't care if it signed by
an InRelease file or a Release.gpg file, so we can save some time by
just generating one of them by default.

Sounds like not much, but quickly adds up to a few seconds with the
amount of tests we have accumulated by now.

Git-Dch: Ignore
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>tests: allow to disable generation of InRelease/Release.gpg file</title>
<updated>2016-05-04T10:12:27Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-05-04T09:10:08Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=761a5ad2ec07f097b05c32427bd0ebddfd587987'/>
<id>urn:sha1:761a5ad2ec07f097b05c32427bd0ebddfd587987</id>
<content type='text'>
If the test just signs release files to throw away one of them to test
the other, we can just as well save the time and not create it.

Git-Dch: Ignore
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>support Signed-By in Release files as a sort of HPKP</title>
<updated>2016-05-01T08:50:24Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-04-29T14:48:16Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=89901946f936446f439b95f1a9a85ac942ac2c92'/>
<id>urn:sha1:89901946f936446f439b95f1a9a85ac942ac2c92</id>
<content type='text'>
Users have the option since apt &gt;= 1.1 to enforce that a Release file is
signed with specific key(s) either via keyring filename or fingerprints.
This commit adds an entry with the same name and value (except that it
doesn't accept filenames for obvious reasons) to the Release file so
that the repository owner can set a default value for this setting
effecting the *next* Release file, not the current one, which provides a
functionality similar "HTTP Public Key Pinning". The pinning is in
effect as long as the (then old) Release file is considered valid, but
it is also ignored if the Release file has no Valid-Until at all.
</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>support multiple fingerprints in signed-by</title>
<updated>2016-05-01T08:50:24Z</updated>
<author>
<name>David Kalnischkies</name>
<email>david@kalnischkies.de</email>
</author>
<published>2016-04-29T08:16:42Z</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://git.kalnischkies.de/apt/commit/?id=46e00c9062d09a642973e83a334483db1f310397'/>
<id>urn:sha1:46e00c9062d09a642973e83a334483db1f310397</id>
<content type='text'>
A keyring file can include multiple keys, so its only fair for
transitions and such to support multiple fingerprints as well.
</content>
</entry>
</feed>
