From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: GnuPG in Guix Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 09:21:55 +0100 Message-ID: <87sidt9j6k.fsf@mango.localdomain> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48224) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YQtht-0004i2-Mj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 03:22:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YQthq-0008DM-I2 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 03:22:05 -0500 Received: from sender1.zohomail.com ([74.201.84.155]:29328) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YQthq-0008DD-A8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 03:22:02 -0500 In-reply-to: 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: "g33k0b0y ." Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org g33k0b0y . writes: > It seems that Guix can install multiple versions of GPG. It names the > 1.4.18 version as gpg, and the 2.0.26 version as gpg2. [...] > If I am an inexperienced user and install gnupg, from my previous > experience with other distros, (Trisquel, gNewSense) I would expect to > use gpg to call it. Imagine my surprise when bash says command not > found! I am never told to use gpg2 as the command, nor would I think > of it. On Fedora 21, /usr/bin/gpg2 is installed by the package for version 2.x.x (gnupg2-2.0.25-2) and /usr/bin/gpg is installed by the package for version 1.x.x (gnupg-1.4.18-4). I would not expect to use /usr/bin/gpg when I installed gnupg2, because that only comes with /usr/bin/gpg2. I happen to have both installed on my Fedora system. I do not think that we should override upstream's decision to call these executables by a different name. ~~ Ricardo