From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Apr 21 22:24:27 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F764D49EC9 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 22:24:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jim@ohlste.in) Received: from mail-qt0-x234.google.com (mail-qt0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0278B394 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 22:24:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jim@ohlste.in) Received: by mail-qt0-x234.google.com with SMTP id c45so79911707qtb.1 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:24:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ohlste-in.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E8HExOUH2XONTgC8N63IkJR/zsTs/kKFmRYPWaiiTeo=; b=ofzuYWtO8u4KrMVifwCJyp3ZpTp7a/RIsWuYPgrCcVcNCgli4JRL/rei5aIKvHyAFW 8Qx8vBWcNAAu2dMMDfvOz482SbH/TQ+t7JV4FFcouCp95dZugCWyxO8ZbLL7viFcx2Rf etCdP0FxYNeQaWHZ8TtUIY0TjU+DdRbquT6PnOEtw76el0JfIovHapvypc/FrAonbhU/ E9pAR57acOheaoOuBAEofP9pDzxMsSXkARt9IMhhy82o67ubduxcQ7jeRQAEQswipnRi TRo9cBXdU0fhl59ifDFjnN8fPD3uoNYklsmFf75et1IVE8TXnyDtHJMUng956IM+Z+Gx SwZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E8HExOUH2XONTgC8N63IkJR/zsTs/kKFmRYPWaiiTeo=; b=OSRKK4KjT4O0e2m40Iy0KctZL9uV/HLsneKEp9Gbi8m5aFhI9+dCNB68xx8RvbI8LP gbzwZJAcp0MIkU7fNw0hXbB/gUXs/In+95WSUkw61qFuhWVrDOTzy2D+GHRf1iuQoCNy R/ljHNhHQRzf7o0N6HS8stcFRWvjjdQfkQj7J2oxhgm50G1EwEb6fMCTku10PJAHGM4b mp1tfSSMnkHzNZpF2H0wxw5yddQapPmTRnxWk1z93oHOQmGFLGdhNegRkRVzGJj4iP0e wJ5PtLIaCxdwKQldLDZTFfXVqnUSphaqMpQ/9ieujGv33ZVAXPeOEMRBuMusgOtrVI8r F2aA== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/4wQBMUBTWp4XoIhnmg+ZDLcLzhCQL0W6GvBW11rxLne6vUrfzE AZXYjoFfIYd3TdSb X-Received: by 10.200.45.60 with SMTP id n57mr16555237qta.15.1492813464809; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:24:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (static-70-104-198-154.nrflva.fios.verizon.net. [70.104.198.154]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id q66sm7253837qkd.69.2017.04.21.15.24.23 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:24:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: gnupg and gnupg2 To: David Mehler , User questions References: From: Jim Ohlstein Message-ID: <1b4fc0ce-9121-f7b2-661c-b48894df382c@ohlste.in> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 18:24:22 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 22:24:27 -0000 Hello, On 4/21/17 2:30 PM, David Mehler wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks. Here's the output. Can I get clamav-unofficial-sigs to link > against gnupg and not gnupg1? Is this something the port should do? > > pkg info -r gnupg > gnupg-2.1.20: > spamassassin-3.4.1_10 > > pkg info -r gnupg1 > gnupg1-1.4.21_3: > clamav-unofficial-sigs-5.3.2_1 It looks like the option is to build mail/spamassassin with either or neither (note that one or the other seems to be required for updates). If you build your own, you can alter the configuration of mail/spamassassin using 'make config'. > > On 4/21/17, Gerard Seibert wrote: >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 20:46:58 -0400, Jim Ohlstein stated: >> >>> On Apr 20, 2017, 8:27 PM -0400, David Mehler , >>> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I've got a 10.3 system. I just noticed I've got both gnupg 1.4 and >>>> gnupg 2.0. My question is can I get rid of gnupg1 and use the >>>> gnupg2? >> >>> They're both ports, not part of base. Evidently you have at least one >>> port that relies on each. >> >> Perhaps running "pkg info -r gnupg20" >> >> and "pkg info -r gnupg1" might help. >> >> Actually, the latest version in port is "gnupg-2.1.20" You might be >> able to remove the other two versions and just link to that one. >> >> -- >> Carmel -- Jim Ohlstein "Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." - Mark Twain