> mutt: 2.0.4
> pinentry: 1.1.0_7
> pinentry-tty: 1.1.0
> spamass-milter: 0.4.0_4
> spamassassin: 3.4.4
> subversion: 1.14.0
>
> I've looked through he config for all of these and not seen anything about
> PIN entry, an
gpgme: 1.15.1
> mimedefang: 2.83_3
> mutt: 2.0.4
> pinentry: 1.1.0_7
> pinentry-tty: 1.1.0
> spamass-milter: 0.4.0_4
> spamassassin: 3.4.4
> subversion: 1.14.0
>
> I've looked through he config for all of thes
I ma trying to figure out why pin entry and pinetnry-tty are installed. If I
try to remove it, I get a list of post that are to be deleted.
Installed packages to be REMOVED:
gnupg: 2.2.27
gpgme: 1.15.1
mimedefang: 2.83_3
mutt: 2.0.4
pinentry: 1.1.0_7
Hello,
I use security/pinentry-qt5 in KDE5 on FreeBSD CURRENT (all from SVN
HEAD, compiled by my own, ports with poudriere on February, 11).
security/pinentry-qt5 is used to unlock my OpenPGP card. In the past the
pinentry-qt5 pop-up window have had automatically the focus, now the
focus stays
FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE #0 r274401
When attempting to build "pinentry-qt4", I am receiving the following error
message:
===> Staging for pinentry-0.9.0_1
===> pinentry-0.9.0_1 depends on executable: pinentry-qt4 - not found
===>Verifying install for pinentry-qt4 in
Jun-SAN,
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014, Jun Kuriyama wrote:
> At Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:36:24 +0300 (MSK),
> Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> > > > pinentry currently brokes if WITHOUT_X11 (or, by new world orderm
> > > > OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11) is set.
> > >
> > > Y
At Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:36:24 +0300 (MSK),
Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> > > pinentry currently brokes if WITHOUT_X11 (or, by new world orderm
> > > OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11) is set.
> >
> > You can use security/pinentry-curses if you don't want Qt/GTK+ gui.
>
On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:23:38 +0300 (MSK) Dmitry Morozovsky
wrote
> On Tue, 23 Dec 2014, Chris H wrote:
>
> > > >It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely
> > > >lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill the
> > &
Max,
On Wed, 24 Dec 2014, Max Brazhnikov wrote:
> > > > > >It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely
> > > > > >lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill
> > > > > >the
> > > > >
On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:00:26 + Max Brazhnikov wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:23:38 +0300 Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Dec 2014, Chris H wrote:
> >
> > > > >It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely
> > > > >lightwe
On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:23:38 +0300 Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Dec 2014, Chris H wrote:
>
> > > >It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely
> > > >lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill the
> > > &g
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014, Chris H wrote:
> > >It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely
> > >lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill the
> > >dependency bloat and have a simple shell-based password entry option.
> &g
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 13:51:11 + Matt Smith wrote
> On Dec 23 07:44, Mark Felder wrote:
> >
> >It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely
> >lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill the
> >dependency bloat and have a
On Dec 23 07:44, Mark Felder wrote:
It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely
lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill the
dependency bloat and have a simple shell-based password entry option.
Anyone up for a weekend challenge? :-)
There has
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014, at 03:46, Matt Smith wrote:
> On Dec 22 22:33, Jonathan Chen wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Once upon a time, installing gnupg didn't require pinentry, and I
> >could run it quite happily on the command line. However, nowadays if I
> >install the
On Mon, 22 Dec 2014, Max Brazhnikov wrote:
> > pinentry currently brokes if WITHOUT_X11 (or, by new world orderm
> > OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11) is set.
>
> You can use security/pinentry-curses if you don't want Qt/GTK+ gui.
Ah I see. Maybe then security/gnupg should detect hea
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:26:27 +0300 Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Max,
>
> pinentry currently brokes if WITHOUT_X11 (or, by new world orderm
> OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11) is set.
You can use security/pinentry-curses if you don't want Qt/GTK+ gui.
> what do you think about the followi
On Dec 22 22:33, Jonathan Chen wrote:
Hi,
Once upon a time, installing gnupg didn't require pinentry, and I
could run it quite happily on the command line. However, nowadays if I
install the port it drags in pinentry and a whole set of graphical
libraries that I don't really need on
Hi,
Once upon a time, installing gnupg didn't require pinentry, and I
could run it quite happily on the command line. However, nowadays if I
install the port it drags in pinentry and a whole set of graphical
libraries that I don't really need on a headless box. Is pinentry
really re
On 19/12/2014 11:26 PM, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Max,
>
> pinentry currently brokes if WITHOUT_X11 (or, by new world orderm
> OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11) is set.
>
> what do you think about the following patch?
>
> marck@castor:/FreeBSD/ports/ports/security/pinentry>
Max,
pinentry currently brokes if WITHOUT_X11 (or, by new world orderm
OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11) is set.
what do you think about the following patch?
marck@castor:/FreeBSD/ports/ports/security/pinentry> svn diff
Index: Makef
Tobias Rehbein wrote:
> Or is there some way to use gpg without pinentry?
You could use security/gnupg1 instead (which is still developed, just
a seperate branch), which doens't require pinentry.
Ciao,
Johan
pgp2IwUtXegLB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 17:25:56 +0200
Tobias Rehbein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps someone can share his wisdom with me. I just installed security/gnupg
> and tried to create a key pair using "gpg --gen-key". After issuing the
> command
> gnupg barfed at me that p
Hi all.
Perhaps someone can share his wisdom with me. I just installed security/gnupg
and tried to create a key pair using "gpg --gen-key". After issuing the command
gnupg barfed at me that pinentry could not be started. Now I wonder why pinentry
is not a dependency of gpg as it seems
Doug Barton wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Rakhesh Sasidharan wrote:
BTW, I ask coz I don't know: as a matter of etiquette, is it a good idea to
cc the author/ maintainer of the port even if he/ she is subscribed to the
list?
I think that both tradition and expediency say "yes." You happened t
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Rakhesh Sasidharan wrote:
BTW, I ask coz I don't know: as a matter of etiquette, is it a good idea to
cc the author/ maintainer of the port even if he/ she is subscribed to the
list?
I think that both tradition and expediency say "yes." You happened to
catch me on a nigh
can't exec
`/usr/local/bin/pinentry': No such file or directory'
The pkg-message for gnupg clearly says that you need to have a pinentry
program. Glad you figured that bit out.
Now that you mention, yeah, it does! Funny I missed it out. Since it
mentions pinentry there, tha
x27;t exec
`/usr/local/bin/pinentry': No such file or directory'
The pkg-message for gnupg clearly says that you need to have a pinentry
program. Glad you figured that bit out.
--8<-- Two questions here:
1) Why isn't security/pinentry pulled in as a dependency of security
Hi there!
I installed mail/pine and security/gnupg from ports. While trying to use
gnupg, whenever it needed to ask me for the passphrase, I ran into errors
such as the below:
gpg-agent[86284]: can't connect server: `ERR 67109133 can't exec
`/usr/local/bin/pinentry':
Hello,
I've updated GnuPG to latest version (2.0.3) from ports, and it stopped
working until I installed security/pinentry. This is what it was displaying
prior to installing pinentry:
% gpg --clearsign configure > bla
Warning: using insecure memory!
You need a passphrase to unlock th
30 matches
Mail list logo
