Hi, Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hello! > > ng0 <n...@we.make.ritual.n0.is> skribis: > >> From 6babb18479de83bd19c44412c7957918d2c917b2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: ng0 <n...@we.make.ritual.n0.is> >> Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 22:11:41 +0000 >> Subject: [PATCH 4/6] gnu: Add gpgscm. >> >> * gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (gpgscm): New variable. > > [...] > >> + (home-page "https://gnupg.org/";) >> + (synopsis "tinyscheme implementation used by The GNU Privacy Guard") > > I’ve seen some of the discussions on IRC about gpgscm. However, it’s > not clear to me why we should make it a separate package. AIUI, it’s > meant as a purely GnuPG-internal tool, and as such it may evolve in > lockstep with the rest of the GnuPG code base. > > So I’d be tempted to keep it internal to GnuPG, unless upstream decides > to make it a separate package (which seems unlikely; it may be come part > of libgpg-error, though.) > > WDYT? > > Thanks, > Ludo’. I'm not familiar with all the short words being used all the time. What is AIUI? "As I understand it"? I think I forgot to add more descriptions above this patch and the gnupg one. It should've read: This is a not very pleasant, but working hack to enable building >=gnupg-2.1.14 without wasting much time on having to built gpgscm in the gnupg package. Whoever wants to fix this may step forward and do it, I am done with this as I need to focus on something else. This is left intentionally with comments for other people to improve in case we even use this. Else, someone can improve my gnupg-2.1.14 patch and make the gpgscm patc obsolete. -- ♥Ⓐ ng0 For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org SecuShare – http://secushare.org
