Hi,
Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> writes:
> over on Bug #1023782 ("Add dependency on pinentry-x11") about
> webext-browserpass,
> Meeuwissen Olaf wrote:
>
>> Please add a dependency on pinentry-x11. This is a pure virtual package that
>> makes the user pick one. I think that is to be preferred over adding a list
>> of
>> alternatives directly because the package managers tend to pick the first one
>> listed.
>
> Arguably, pinentry-x11 is a misnomer, because pinentry-gnome3 works in
> any GNOME graphical environment, including ones that are purely based on
> Wayland, with no X11 whatsoever.
Fully agree on the misnomer part. Point in case, I noticed this using
sway (with xwayland installed) and installed pinentry-gnome3.
> But we don't have a pinentry-gui virtual package at the moment, so
> pinentry-x11 is probably the right choice.
Maybe pinentry-gui should be added as a pure virtual package? And in
due course, pinentry-x11 removed? Anyway, that's not food for the
webext-browserpass package.
> It should definitely be at least a Recommends: given pass's reliance
> on GnuPG, and GnuPG's transitive reliance (through gpg-agent) on a
> graphical password prompter.
I was getting by fine for the most part with pinentry-tty until I tried
to integrate browserpass ;-)
> It's this tangled mess of dependencies that makes it necessary for the
> bits that are designed to run in a graphical environment (like
> browserpass) to explicitly declare their dependencies on graphical
> pinentry specifically.
Guess what! webext-browserpass doesn't even depend on pass! :-o
Oh, just noticed that pass (or gopass) is not actually required[1].
Maybe that should become a Recommends: too, with a note in the package
description why it's not a Depends: ...
[1]: https://github.com/browserpass/browserpass-extension#requirements
--
Olaf Meeuwissen
