Am Samstag, den 28.07.2012, 12:20 -0700 schrieb Ian Zimmerman: > One rather disconcerting thing about gpa is that it has both gnupg and > gnupg2 in its dependency graph. I wonder if that might account for some > of the weird problems.
I don't think so. However, I'm planning to drop the gnupg1 dependency and let gpa depend on gnupg2 and its toolchain. > What is the purpose of having gnupg v1 around anyway? Can the remaining > packages depending on it not be ported over? GnuPG is an important tool in the Debian toolchain. The 1.x series is much smaller, has lesser dependencies than the 2.x series; further it doesn't need a running agent, it is stable and upstream still actively supports it. IMO it is better suited for terminal-based systems. Therefor I'm currently not in favor of dropping it. But there is one thing, that should IMO be changed in Debian. ATM gnupg 1.x and 2.x series provide different binaries. It has already been requested to introduce a diversion instead, so both packages provide a gpg binary (and both can still provide gpgX (X=1,2) binaries). This step can IMO improve the situation. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
