Hi Leo, Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 11:56:41PM -0500, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >> I'm testing this: >> >> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- >> gnu: gnupg: Update to 2.3.3. >> >> * gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (gnupg): Update to 2.3.3. >> (gnupg-2.2.32): Delete variable. >> (qgpgme)[native-inputs]: Use the regular gnupg package. > > Okay. Make sure to also adjust emacs-pinentry. > > I tested with GnuPG 2.2.23 by building all packages that depend directly > on GnuPG. There were no new failures on x86_64-linux when using GnuPG > 2.2.32. I ended up sticking with 2.2.33, since this is the current "LTS" release. Unfortunately it fails 3 new tests of python-gnupg, and its author think it is a regression in GnuPG itself [0]. [0] https://github.com/vsajip/python-gnupg/issues/163 We'll see what upstream has to say about it. Thank you, Maxim
