On Mon, Dec 22, 2014, at 03:46, Matt Smith wrote: > On Dec 22 22:33, Jonathan Chen wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Once upon a time, installing gnupg didn't require pinentry, and I > >could run it quite happily on the command line. However, nowadays if I > >install the port it drags in pinentry and a whole set of graphical > >libraries that I don't really need on a headless box. Is pinentry > >really required for gnupg to run correctly? > > > > I believe in version 2.1.x they made entering the passphrase via > pinentry basically mandatory and deprecated being able to do it via > stdin methods. So it probably pulls in pinentry by default now. For > binary packages this is unfortunatly going to default to all the front > ends which includes ones for X. For port based source installs you can > deselect the ones for X and only leave the ncurses one which then just > pulls in one extra dependancy. Unfortunately that's the downside of > binary package installs. > > FYI, you can also re-enable passphrases by stdin if required by adding > allow-loopback-pinentry to .gnupg/gpg-agent.conf and using the > --pinentry-mode=loopback command line switch to gpg. >
It looks as though it would be feasible to write an extremely lightweight pinentry-compatible program to depend on so we can kill the dependency bloat and have a simple shell-based password entry option. Anyone up for a weekend challenge? :-) _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
