X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120429004549.GA22599@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> References: <4F9B1EF7.1080501@comcast.net> <4F9B6DC1.3030303@gmail.com> <4F9B77B1.9070200@gmail.com> <4F9C22B1.5000405@comcast.net> <20120428180621.GA23030@calimero.vinschen.de> <20120428205029.GB20709@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20120429004549.GA22599@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 01:51:36 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Using Red Hat digital signing on setup.exe (was Re: Cygwin 1.7.14-2 setup.exe v2.772 broken?) From: Nick Lowe To: cygwin@cygwin.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com "I installed 2.772 on my systems as soon as it was available and I don't see any such issue using my local mirror. Did you try another mirror?" Quite, but the idea of corruption was implicit in that question. A digital signature would rule that out. It was only a suggestion to ensure that that would never be a possibility. What's with the hostility? It's really bad etiquette... ;) Nick -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple