On 2022-11-07 13:36:30 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > The removal of gpgme-config due to > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1022348 > > breaks the build of software relying on it, such as Mutt: > > https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt/-/issues/430 > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1022348
I meant https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1023599 here. > It was removed without letting developers adapt their code first. > Actually I'm not even sure that this is the right long-term decision; > upstream code should be fixed instead. > > I can see in the changelog: > > * Fix FTBFS after removal of gpg-error-config (Closes: #1022348) > * gpgme-config not installed anymore > > It seems that the removal of gpg-error-config was a Debian decision > not to keep it with its build rules: > https://dev.gnupg.org/T5683 says "Now, we can consider deprecation > of gpg-error-config, to show preference to gpgrt-config. [...] > Distributions still can install it (by their own make rule), because > gpg-error-config will be kept distributed and built well." > > So, if I understand correctly, either gpgme-config should be based on > gpgrt-config rather than gpg-error-config (this should be an upstream > change), or gpg-error-config should be re-added as suggested. Actually gpgrt-config can be used instead of gpgme-config. But this requires changes in existing code, possibly non trivial, as now done for Mutt: https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt/-/issues/430 (not yet in Debian). So before gpgme-config gets removed (which is a *recent* upstream change), you should make sure that existing code based on it has been updated. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
