On the broken dependency list

[Michael Favia]

Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Jesse Keating (jkeating at j2solutions.net) said: 
>> As for signing packages, I do believe they are signed.
> 
> Generally, in rawhide, packages are signed as follows:
> 
> Key 4F2A6FD2:
>  If they are directly inherited from:
>  - the previous major release
>  - updates for the previous major release
> 
> Key 30C9ECF8:
>  If they are directly inherited from:
>  - a test release
>  - test updates for the previous major release (shouldn't happen)
> 
> Packages that don't fall into these categories will not be signed.

Why not sign all packages distributed by redhat/fedora? Signing packages 
only serves to guarantee the origin of the package not its fitness for 
use. I think i had to disable key checking awhile back in yum because i 
couldnt install the new packages in rawhide (well i assume they were new 
packages based on your feedback above). If you would like to add another 
key for these packages i think that would be fine but i personally think 
that a "gold fedora key" and a "silver fedora key" are enough to 
demonstrate the release status of a package. -mf