[Solved] Missing Signed-By

[maxxedout]

After do a DU today I get this message with apt update on most source lists.
Missing Signed-By in the sources.list(5) entry for 'http://packages.siduction.org/extra'

Can someone please point to info on how to fix this?
Thanks

[eriefisher]

Somebody didn't bother to look.

https://forum.siduction.org/index.php?topic=9606.0

[maxxedout]

Thanks, that fixed it.

But just because i didn't fine this post doesn't mean i didn't try so solve this on my own.

[seasons]

Is there any way to tell apt to stop nagging me with these "Notices"? My sources work fine as is and I don't feel like changing them.

[dibl]

In the official Debian manpages for Buster:

https://manpages.debian.org/buster/apt/sources.list.5.en.html

They wrote "It is intended to make this format gradually the default format, deprecating the previously described one-line-style format ,,,"

To me, that does not indicate that there will be an escape option.

[seasons]

They wrote "It is intended to make this format gradually the default format, deprecating the previously described one-line-style format"

Okay, you convinced me (thanks for the moral support).
I converted everything but the steam sources. That file is part of the steam-launcher package though, so I don't want to modify it. apt is not complaining about that one anyway (maybe because it's signed?). Hopefully, steam will update it to the new format before the old one becomes unaccepted.

[michaa7]

Hi...

How do I configure apt for different suites (experimental, unstable, testing)?

Like

Code Select Expand

...
suites:  experimental unstable testing
...

within one "block" (don't know a better suitable word) or do I need individual "blocks" for each of them? It's suites, wich suggests there could be more than one ...

[hendrikL]

Hi...

How do I configure apt for different suites (experimental, unstable, testing)?

Like

Code Select Expand

...
suites:  experimental unstable testing
...

within one "block" (don't know a better suitable word) or do I need individual "blocks" for each of them? It's suites, wich suggests there could be more than one ...

schau mal da  hin:
https://forum.siduction.org/index.php?topic=9606.msg76527#msg76527

And yes, I tested it, and it works.

[michaa7]

... sorry for my double posting. I couldn't find the first one this morning and then I thougt I had somehow messed up in the night.

Thanks for pointing me to this posting.

[seasons]

do I need individual "blocks" for each of them?

I had to do multiple blocks for deb-multimedia because not all suites have the same "components" (their experimental suite does not have non-free). A unified block technically works, but apt gives warnings that it couldn't find non-free for experimental.
So I ended up with:

Code Select Expand

Types: deb deb-src
URIs: https://mirror.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/debian-multimedia/
Suites: unstable
Components: main non-free
Signed-By: /usr/share/keyrings/deb-multimedia-keyring.pgp

Types: deb deb-src
URIs: https://mirror.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/debian-multimedia/
Suites: experimental
Components: main
Signed-By: /usr/share/keyrings/deb-multimedia-keyring.pgp

While I hope this suffices for many years to come, if anyone knows how I can simplify that (and not get apt warnings), it would be an interesting learning exercise for me.