[Dev] [RFC] [libretools] To --armor or --no-armor package signatures?

[jc_gargma]

> > Hi,
> > 
> > I was cleaning up some code in libretools, and I noticed that
> > librerelease passes --armor to GPG when creating package signatures.
> > This is at odds with `makepkg --sign` passing --no-armor to GPG.
> 
> mmm which ones are lighter in bytes?  i think armored signatures are
> only useful for email transport?
Armored is also useful for posting on forums and other places where attaching 
of raw files is limited.

In regards to bytes, unarmored signatures are roughly 33% smaller.


-jc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170525/44eb6524/attachment.sig>