[Dnsmasq-discuss] Announce: dnsmasq-2.69

[Dave Reisner]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:36:08PM +0100, Simon Kelley wrote:
> On 09/04/14 21:32, Dave Reisner wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:13:33PM +0100, Simon Kelley wrote:
> >> Dnsmasq-2.69 is here.
> >>
> >> http://www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/dnsmasq-2.69.tar.gz
> >>
> >> and (new) a signature
> >>
> >> http://www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/dnsmasq-2.69.tar.gz.sign
> >>
> > 
> > Hi Simon,
> > 
> > Thanks for providing GPG signatures for the source tarballs. Could I ask
> > why you've chosen this particular extension? 
> 
> Ignorance, plain and simple. I'm new to this stuff, and not familiar
> with the conventions.
> 
> > GPG normally expects .asc
> > (ascii armored) or .sig (raw binary) extensions so this is somewhat
> > unexpexcted. Verification still works, but it's not documented anywhere
> > in gpg's manpage as an expected extension. To complicate matters
> > somewhat more, kernel.org uses .sign as an extension but treats the
> > situation differently -- they provide a single .sign file but multiple
> > compression formats for the source tarballs. The signature validates
> > against the decompressed tarball. This doesn't seem to be the case here,
> > as the .sign validates against the gzip tarball.
> > 
> > I humbly ask that you use .asc for the signature.
> > 
> Sounds sensible, I'll change it now, before any dependencies form on my
> initial setup.

Great! Thanks for the quick turnaround!

> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> Simon.
> 
> 
>