[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

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]