Hi Daniel,
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Tue 2016-08-30 06:49:30 -0400, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> >> However, if your next upload of php-crypt-gpg can't be built or run
> >> against modern versions of GnuPG, then you probably need to state this
> >> package's dependency on gnupg as gnupg (<= 2.1).
> >
> > Shouldn't "gnupg1" be used then nowadays?
>
> that would involve a fix of forcing php-crypt-gpg to use and look for
> /usr/bin/gpg1.
Correct.
> that would make me sad, because it would mean that the users of
> php-crypt-gpg would be unable to benefit from the work happening on
> GnuPG's modern branch.
Well, I consider that to be a temporary workaround, not a permanent
solution. Like with libgnupg-interface-perl or python-gnupg.
> So yeah, it's possible to do it that way but i really hope it doesn't
> come to that.
Well, if you (build-)depend on "gnupg (<= 2.1)" and upload to
unstable, the package will no more be installable on Unstable nor
buildable on Unstable due to unsatisfiable (build-)dependencies as the
gnupg package in Unstable is already at a version >> 2.1.
So I don't see how depending on "gnupg (<= 2.1)" could be considered a
solution at all.
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
