Re: devotee (in)compatible signature

On Wed, Aug 26, 2026 at 04:55:48PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> On 26.08.26 14:23, Lionel Élie Mamane wrote:
> > gpg: WARNING: unsafe permissions on homedir '/srv/vote.debian.org/data/gr_llm'
> > gpg: packet(2) with unknown version 5
> > gpg: no signature found
> > gpg: the signature could not be verified.
> > [GNUPG:] NODATA 3[GNUPG:] NODATA 4
> Bah. Don't we all hate the gnupg-vs-sq protocol version split …

The schism is over: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/B7ytSFXTVW84UfFd4cCW-DXhpAA/
and https://github.com/gpg/gnupg/commits/wk/rfc9980/
 
> I wonder what would be involved in teaching sq to at least verify gnupg's v5
> packets. Seems like an ideal task for an AI [SCNR].

casualy promoting the result of intellectual robbery, how nice of you. [SCNR]


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

 ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
 ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
 ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
 ⠈⠳⣄

Es ist das laute Nein, hinter dem Ausrufezeichen stehen.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=toiW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----