From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: GnuPG in Guix Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:16:12 +0100 Message-ID: <87zj804mqr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87sidt9j6k.fsf@mango.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52279) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YR22u-0003fD-Vn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:16:26 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YR22p-00045k-VW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:16:20 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:55828) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YR22p-00045K-TN for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:16:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87sidt9j6k.fsf@mango.localdomain> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Thu, 26 Feb 2015 09:21:55 +0100") 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: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > I do not think that we should override upstream's decision to call these > executables by a different name. +1 Mark H Weaver skribis: > Apart from the issue that raised above, another issue is that one cannot > currently use "guix package -u" if one prefers to use gnupg 1.4.x, > because it will always try to update to 2.0.x, and soon it will try to > upgrade all of us to 2.1.x, which not everyone will want (at least not > right away) because it brings new incompatible changes. This is a different issue, but yes, maybe the =E2=80=9Cold=E2=80=9D one sho= uld have its name changed to =E2=80=9Cgnupg1=E2=80=9D. What do people think? Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.