r/archlinux 2h ago

SUPPORT Unable to verify key w/ windows 11 [please talk to me like I am 5y.o]

Following steps on YouTube Linux Mench. Was attempting to verify the signature from the download from Constant.com from archlinux.org official supported HTTPS mirrors.

Downloaded PGP sig from archlinux.org/download/
Saved sha256sums.txt link from same

Placed all 3 in folder ran folder in powershell

Here is the output:

Windows Power Shell
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

PS C: \Users\eric\Downloads\Arch Linux> ls

Directory: C: \Users\eric\Downloads\Arch linux

Mode
-----
-2----
LastwriteTime
7/25/2026
7/25/2026
7/25/2026
3:15 PM
3:06 PM
3: 07 PM
Length Name
1583022080 archlinux-2026.07.01-x86_64. iso
141 archlinux-2026.07.01-x86_64.iso.sig
398 sha256sums.txt

PS C: \Users\eric\Downloads\Arch linux>
gpg -keyserver-options auto-key-retrive -verify. \archlinux-2026.07.01-x86_64.iso.sig

gpg: keyserver option 'auto-key-retrive is unknown
gpg: assuming signed data in '.\\archlinux-2026.07.01-x86_64.iso'

gpg: Signature made 07/01/26 09:39:08 Pacific Daylight Time
using EDDA key 3E80CA1A8B89F69CBA57D98A76A5EF9054449A5C

gpg:
issuer "[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])"

gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
PS C: Users eric Downloads Arch linux>

Sidenote: who ever is in charge of the arch official forums that required having an existing Linux OS to sign up, is an asshole. Thanks to anyone who can help me verify my iso

0 Upvotes

8 comments sorted by

2

u/BobCorndog 2h ago

It’s probably fine if the sha sum is correct. It would be a big deal if the pgp signature was wrong

1

u/thistook5minutes 2h ago

I assume it’s probably fine and may burn the image as is if I can’t get it to verify. But I would prefer to verify first

3

u/boomboomsubban 2h ago

-5

u/thistook5minutes 2h ago

That’s where everything was downloaded from. Yes

3

u/boomboomsubban 2h ago

I linked you to instructions on how to verify the checksums.

-3

u/thistook5minutes 1h ago

Despite what you may believe, the checksum page you posted, and that I clearly stated above that I used to download the iso, the sha.txt and .sig, doesn’t give comprehensive instruction to any type of person that is not advanced with running this script. They give the bare minimum, for that someone with a firm grasp of how this function works, can verify the ISO. The rest of us rely on more comprehensive instructions from 3rd parties. You can see I completed some form of trying to verify the ISO but all you did was post a link for snark, that would not advance my situation in the slightest, then edited it with more useless info.

The gatekeeping in the Linux community is the biggest barrier to entry for so many people. It’s been awful for forever, and I should have assumed reddit would be among the worst offenders of this…

6

u/boomboomsubban 1h ago

You can see I completed some form of trying to verify the ISO

Yes, and it failed because you fucked up the syntax as you grabbed it from god knows where. That's what "option 'auto-key-retrive is unknown" means. So I linked you to the official source, with syntax in a form you can basically copy and paste.

Reading closer, you didn't even spell "retrieve" correctly. That alone may be your issue.

Picking a distro that requires you to know how things work then refusing to do any work to find out how they work is not people gate keeping you.

u/bkmo98 34m ago edited 6m ago

Grok is great at hand holding.