From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 12 08:47:28 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF5716A412; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 08:47:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kuriyama@imgsrc.co.jp) Received: from black.imgsrc.co.jp (black.imgsrc.co.jp [210.226.20.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D800443C9D; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 08:45:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kuriyama@imgsrc.co.jp) Received: from localhost (magenta.imgsrc.co.jp [210.226.20.134]) by black.imgsrc.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1A1A50EBE; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 17:46:50 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: IMG SRC scanner at virus.imgsrc.co.jp (magenta) Received: from black.imgsrc.co.jp ([210.226.20.147]) by localhost (magenta.imgsrc.co.jp [210.226.20.134]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xtK1PsCXMGUc; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 17:46:50 +0900 (JST) Received: from pink.imgsrc.co.jp (pink.imgsrc.co.jp [210.226.20.36]) by black.imgsrc.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A93350E70; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 17:46:50 +0900 (JST) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 17:46:50 +0900 Message-ID: <7mbqm9ijr9.wl%kuriyama@imgsrc.co.jp> From: Jun Kuriyama To: Doug Barton In-Reply-To: <457E5DB4.7030204@FreeBSD.org> References: <7mu003jdyg.wl%kuriyama@imgsrc.co.jp> <457DA05F.8010805@FreeBSD.org> <7mr6v6ht57.wl%kuriyama@imgsrc.co.jp> <457E5DB4.7030204@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Shij=F2?=) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.3 (i386--freebsd) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Andrew Pantyukhin Subject: Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 08:47:28 -0000 At Mon, 11 Dec 2006 23:43:48 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > If this is your plan, it leads me to the next question, which is how > are you going to handle the fact that GnuPG 2.x does not install a > binary named "gpg?" Will you install a symlink if gnupg1 is not > installed? And if so, will it CONFLICT with that port? If we are going > to suggest to users that 2.x is the default, I think we need to > provide support for those legacy(?) apps that think gnupg is spelled gpg. Yes, that's my difficult decision in this upgrade. I understand you care about existing users not to violate POLA, but I basically choose this way for new users. :-( If "gpg" binary consumer is ports-installed one and have explicit dependency on its Makefile, "portupgrade -R gnupg" will install security/gnupg *AND* security/gnupg1. But if is is not from ports, just only users from command line or have implicit dependency (like mail/mailcrypt which I'm using), only "gpg2" binary is exist after portupgrade. I have no clue about last problem for now (only pkg-message or UPDATING). This maybe critical for casual portupgrade users. > > we should be insanely grateful for more than 8 years > > of his impeccable gnupg maintainership. > > Having spent a non-zero amount of time working on a gnupg2 port for my > own use, not to mention the updates of the related ports to get 2.x to > build, I agree with you that we should be appreciative of Jun's > efforts, and I hope that he understands that nothing I've said is > intended in any way to be critical of him or his work. I appreciate Doug's work of course. This thread is just which option we choose from possible ways. And mainly caused my lack of explanation. -- Jun Kuriyama // IMG SRC, Inc. // FreeBSD Project