Adding 0x26752624 at this URL http://sks-keyservers.net/i/
indicates that the pub key is typical (rpm expects self-signed
pubkeys aka POSITIVE_CERTIFICATION, and does not support
subkey signing through gpg).
That pub key is widely used, so there's something specific
to how these pkgs were built (or there would be zillions of
bug reports).
What version of gpg was used to sign these packages? What is
different about how the
drakconf-icons-12.19.2-1.2-mdv2011.0.noarch.rpm
was produced and signed and distributed?
I will delve into the RFC 2440/4880 packets included in the
drakconf-icons-12.19.2-1.2-mdv2011.0.noarch.rpm tags next
on the way to identifying the root cause.
Adding 0x26752624 at this URL sks-keyservers. net/i/ CERTIFICATION, and does not support
http://
indicates that the pub key is typical (rpm expects self-signed
pubkeys aka POSITIVE_
subkey signing through gpg).
That pub key is widely used, so there's something specific
to how these pkgs were built (or there would be zillions of
bug reports).
What version of gpg was used to sign these packages? What is icons-12. 19.2-1. 2-mdv2011. 0.noarch. rpm
different about how the
drakconf-
was produced and signed and distributed?
I will delve into the RFC 2440/4880 packets included in the icons-12. 19.2-1. 2-mdv2011. 0.noarch. rpm tags next
drakconf-
on the way to identifying the root cause.