On 19/02/18 19:45, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > But shrugging and suggesting it's uncontroversial to upgrade arbitrary > machines to the latest version of GnuPG doesn't appreciate the scope of > the problem involved with software maintenance in an active and > interdependent ecosystem.
You are right and I feel stupid for suggesting it is uncontroversial. Hell, you'd think running Debian stretch/stable (with its 2.1.18) on a plethora of servers would be uncontroversial, but even that isn't totally free of controversy. There are people having problems with adjusting their process to use GnuPG 2.1+. I am very grateful for all the work you put in to not only fix programs in Debian depending on /usr/bin/gpg2 being 2.0, but also fix programs depending on /usr/bin/gpg being 1.4. Because even though co-installability was considered while designing 2.1, in practice 1.4 and 2.1+ don't mix well. Thank you. If done with care and attention, there are still situations where installing GnuPG 2.2 on what is the most recent version of CentOS/RHEL is a good thing to do. You have to carefully consider which software will be using GnuPG, though. Peter. -- I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail. You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy. My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
