9 Jun
2011
9 Jun
'11
6:48 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Pang Yan Han <pangyanhan@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Dan, sorry for the late reply, some family matters cropped up over the past week.
Do you think I should reroll this with your suggestions? iirc, the original intent of this patch was to allow the user to have a way to have a trustdb.gpg for pacman to carry out signature verification and to change it if need be.
If it isn't too much trouble I would say go for it- I think this is a valuable option, it just needed some touchups in the implementation. -Dan