On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:44:49PM +0200, Werner Koch wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:38, b...@adversary.org said: > >> bash-4.3$ port search gnupg2 >> gnupg2 @2.0.29 (mail, security) >> GNU pretty-good-privacy package > > I am a bit disapointed to read this name. GnuPG is the GNU Privacy > Guard and not a GNU PGP. PGP and GnuPG implement the same protocol as > do several other software does. Tsss, strange Mac world.
I have a few gripes with them, including the default config that results in things like: 1. Because GPG 2.0 and 2.1 conflict, GPGME and anything that subsequently depends on it cannot be installed without modification. 2. The incorrect names you mentioned. 3. While there are a couple of variations of config that can be chosen, the variation options do not include enabling support for increased secmem or larger RSA key sizes. OTOH the packages are all sourced from the original projects, so the source code is the tarball from gnupg.org. Unlike, for instance, Homebrew, which uses github as an ad-hoc package management repository and while their GPG sources might not be modified in some dodgy way, there is absolutely no way of knowing without comparing each file line by line with the originals. Since macports does let you modify the configuration parameters by editing the portfile and compile from source, all those issues can be fixed manually, but it's still a little irritating. The obvious "solution" is to skip it and compile GPG from source, but if macports doesn't know about that it gets in the way of things like GMIME (which then gets in the way of running Mutt and so on). I think I might have to wander over to the bug tracker and raise a bug on the names anyway. As for the conflicts between 2.0 and 2.1, that ought to get sorted out once 2.0 goes away, or at least gets EOL'd. Regards, Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users