Unless there are any issues with gpg, and to my knowledge there aren't, I can't see any important reason to default 'gpg' to 'gpg2', at least not for f24.
I will say that if this is done, we need to be able to use the normal alternatives system (update-alternatives) to change what's used, without user changes worrying about being in conflict with package updates. On February 17, 2016 12:52:45 AM EST, Christopher <ctubbsii-fed...@apache.org> wrote: >I just ran into this: >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309175 >It's not a huge deal (and there are several workarounds, for git and >for >other tools which default ot using 'gpg'), but it highlights the >mismatch >between the default /usr/bin/gpg running gpg1, when other tools, like >gpg-agent, are tailored for gpg2. > >RHEL/CentOS has shipped /usr/bin/gpg with gnupg2 since at least >sometime in >RHEL6. >I'm not saying we shouldn't continue to ship gnupg1, but can we at >least >rename it, so gnupg package is version 2, and gnupg1 provides >/usr/bin/gpg1 >instead? This seems overdue. Is there any reason not to do this? > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >-- >devel mailing list >devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Sent from my Android device. Please excuse my brevity. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
