From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ng0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] gnu: Add gpgscm. Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 14:10:24 +0000 Message-ID: <87zipf9gvj.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> References: <87lh0z97jm.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87wpkjp1hx.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46094) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bP9Fh-0004ry-JE for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:10:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bP9Fg-0001sj-9y for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:10:33 -0400 Received: from mithlond.libertad.in-berlin.de ([2001:67c:1400:2490::1]:52357 helo=beleriand.n0.is) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bP9Ff-0001sN-Qu for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:10:32 -0400 Received: by beleriand.n0.is (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 6998a93a TLS version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 14:10:28 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <87wpkjp1hx.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Mon, 18 Jul 2016 14:35:54 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello! > > ng0 skribis: > >> From 6babb18479de83bd19c44412c7957918d2c917b2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: ng0 >> Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 22:11:41 +0000 >> Subject: [PATCH 4/6] gnu: Add gpgscm. >> >> * gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (gpgscm): New variable. > > [...] > >> + (home-page "https://gnupg.org/") >> + (synopsis "tinyscheme implementation used by The GNU Privacy Guard") > > I’ve seen some of the discussions on IRC about gpgscm. However, it’s > not clear to me why we should make it a separate package. AIUI, it’s > meant as a purely GnuPG-internal tool, and as such it may evolve in > lockstep with the rest of the GnuPG code base. > > So I’d be tempted to keep it internal to GnuPG, unless upstream decides > to make it a separate package (which seems unlikely; it may be come part > of libgpg-error, though.) > > WDYT? > > Thanks, > Ludo’. I'm not familiar with all the short words being used all the time. What is AIUI? "As I understand it"? I think I forgot to add more descriptions above this patch and the gnupg one. It should've read: This is a not very pleasant, but working hack to enable building >=gnupg-2.1.14 without wasting much time on having to built gpgscm in the gnupg package. Whoever wants to fix this may step forward and do it, I am done with this as I need to focus on something else. This is left intentionally with comments for other people to improve in case we even use this. Else, someone can improve my gnupg-2.1.14 patch and make the gpgscm patc obsolete. -- ♥Ⓐ ng0 For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org SecuShare – http://secushare.org