From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3976A62942 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 17:29:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2FADFF182 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 17:28:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 242A6F176 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 17:28:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DBA0045421 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Sep 2020 17:28:56 +0200 (CEST) To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=c3=bcnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> References: <20200806151750.1460435-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <30a135c0-c86e-f904-d6cd-470a62f66691@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 17:28:55 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:81.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/81.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200806151750.1460435-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.196 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: [pve-devel] applied-series: Re: [RFC proxmox-ve/proxmox-archive-keyring 0/3] split out archive keyring into separate X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:29:28 -0000 On 8/6/20 5:17 PM, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > with proxmox-ve as proof of concept - the other meta packages shipping > keys should be updated in the fashion if we go down this route. > applied the proxmox-ve patches now too, thanks! I mirrored the changes in proxmox-backup-meta, proxmox-mailgateway is still to be done - @Stoiko you want to? :)