[fedora-arm] NetworkManager-glib-0.9.7.0-12.git20121004.fc18.armv5tel.rpm is not signed

[Peter Robinson]

> Package NetworkManager-glib-0.9.7.0-12.git20121004.fc18.armv5tel.rpm is not signed

They'll all be fixed for final.

> Also, I think the final images should include the correct key installed so you aren't prompted with the first update.

I disagree, I want to verify that the key signature against the
published one myself to ensure it's not compromised.

Peter

> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Jerry James <loganjerry at gmail.com>
>> To: Fedora ARM <arm at lists.fedoraproject.org>
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 10:42 AM
>> Subject: [fedora-arm] Write-back vs. write-through for VMs
>>
>> I've been using the vexpress image with QEMU to try to track down some
>> ARM-specific problems in two of my packages.  The VM was unbearably
>> slow at first (by which I mean that a simple "yum upgrade" took over 6
>> hours), until I changed:
>>
>>   -sd "$IMAGE"
>>
>> to:
>>
>>   -drive if=sd,cache=writeback,file="$IMAGE"
>>
>> in boot-vexpress and boot-vexpress+x.  I'm well aware of the danger of
>> using writeback, but ... it's a VM.  With the script as shipped, my
>> hard drive light was on constantly, and the entire host was slowed
>> down dramatically due to insufficient disk bandwidth.  With writeback
>> on, I can re-create the VM and reinstall the packages of interest in
>> very little time, certainly less than even simple operations were
>> taking with write-through on.  Is there some reason why changing the
>> scripts to use writeback would not be a good idea?
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Jerry James
>> http://www.jamezone.org/
>> _______________________________________________
>> arm mailing list
>> arm at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
>>
> _______________________________________________
> arm mailing list
> arm at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm