[pacman-dev] [PATCH 2/7] pacman-key: remove the --adv option

[Dan McGee]

On Friday, July 8, 2011, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 08/07/11 23:55, Dan McGee wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Allan McRae<allan at archlinux.org>  wrote:
>
> The conversion to using parse_options causes this option to break.
> It is preferable to remove the option rather than fix it as it is
> simply a wrapper for "gpg --homedir @sysconfdir@/pacman.d/gnupg".
> Any user using more advanced keyring management than provided by
> pacman-key can manage to point gpg at the right place themselves...
>
> How to manually edit the keyring with gpg will instead be documented
> in the man page in a later commit.
>
>
> I won't lie here, I'm not a fan of this but maybe because I've become
> accustomed to the option being available. It was way easier than
> typing out the long-form gpg command line. "pacman-key --adv --verify
> /tmp/cryptsetup-1.3.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz.sig" is something I just
> pulled out of my command history.
>
> What if we just enforced instead that the entire arg string was quoted:
>      pacman-key --adv "--verify /tmp/cryptsetup-1.3.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz.sig"
> Or perhaps the "don't parse anymore" option:
>      pacman-key --adv -- --verify /tmp/cryptsetup-1.3.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz.sig
>
>
>
> The latter would work, but I am still not entirely convinced about the need for this...
>
> I intend to add a --verify option to pacman-key because I think that would be a fairly common command to use.  Anything else with common usage should also be added to pacman-key.
>
> Is there anything else you used this for?  I just have this nagging feeling that hiding what gpg is doing (we already have --no-permission-warning there by default) is not the way to go.  Not that my opinion is overly strong on this.

That works too- if we add a --verify then I'm fine with this patch.

The --no-perm-warn is likely something we can/should move to a default
gpg.conf file.

-Dan