From: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
To: Troy Sankey <sankeytms@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: pius: Update to 2.2.2-0.891687c.
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 15:02:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161225200230.GA29608@jasmine> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <148269199943.2068.14760851879049354797@what>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2282 bytes --]
On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 01:53:19PM -0500, Troy Sankey wrote:
> Attached is a patch to upgrade pius to a version that works with
> gpg-agent 2.1, in my experience. I have tested this version with
> gnupg@2.1.17 as the gpg input and gpg-agent version, and using a new
> style keybox (pubring.kbx) file as the keyring.
>
> This also effectively reverts commit 31fbf4b6:
>
> "gnu: pius: Depend on GnuPG 2.0 rather than 2.1."
>
> Another thread in guix-devel [0] suggests that pius could not deal with
> gpg-agent 2.1 which is why it may have been configured to use gnupg-2.0.
> The attached patch brings support for 2.1, so I think I am also allowed
> to revert 31fbf4b6.
>
> Note, however, the code comment describes a different concern:
>
> > - ("gpg" ,gnupg-2.0))) ;2.1 fails to talk to gpg-agent 2.0
>
> I have yet to test gpg/gpgme 2.1 with gpg-agent 2.0, mostly due to the
> fact that gnupg 2.0 and 2.1 keep/expect agent sockets in completely
> different directories. I tried a couple of things and lost my patience.
> I do not understand how gpg 2.1 can talk to gpg-agent 2.0 without weird
> hackery.
>
> This version installs from git because it has been 20 days since my
> request to bump the version [1], and I got impatient.
>
> Troy
>
> [0] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-08/msg01885.html
> [1] https://github.com/jaymzh/pius/issues/46
> From 581ff5477ad7dd0d58550ffcfa68116873a1a1bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Troy Sankey <sankeytms@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2016 22:53:07 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: pius: Update to 2.2.2-0.891687c.
>
> * gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (pius): Update to 2.2.2-0.891687c.
> [inputs]: Change GNUPG-2.0 to GNUPG (2.1).
Thanks, this change LGTM.
I think we should start trying to move away from any dependencies on
GnuPG 2.0, since it will be retired in ~12 months:
"There are two major flavours of GnuPG:
2.1.17 is the modern version with support for ECC and many other new features,
2.0.30 is the stable version from an often used branch. This branch will
reach end-of-life on 2017-12-31."
source: https://www.gnupg.org/index.html
I'll look more closely in the next couple days and push if there is no
more feedback.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-25 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-25 18:53 [PATCH] gnu: pius: Update to 2.2.2-0.891687c Troy Sankey
2016-12-25 20:02 ` Leo Famulari [this message]
2016-12-31 0:15 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161225200230.GA29608@jasmine \
--to=leo@famulari.name \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=sankeytms@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).