Fedora Core 5 Status - package signing ?
dtimms at bigpond.net.au
Sat Mar 11 22:31:31 UTC 2006
Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Philippe Rigault (prigault at oricom.ca) said:
>> Thank you, Jesse, for the explaination.
>> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:35:06 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 16:24 -0500, Philippe Rigault wrote:
>>>> Sure, only 2442 RPM packages have been rebuilt out of 2442.
>>> Um, no. These were rebuilt before Test3, and the reason why Test3 took
>>> a while because we wanted to get these built FOR test3 so that they
>>> would get TESTING.
>> I see, I misinterpreted the fact that all packages have a last modification
>> date of March 6 or after, it is true that most carry the same name as in
>> test3. Most of them have therefore been touch'ed and not rebuild, right ?
> They've been signed.
Does that cause the rpm size difference of 160 bytes larger ?
I wondered why many packages are identical in name, but not identical in
More information about the fedora-test-list