Hi Ludovic,
What was the rationale for commit ae3bded, which downgraded the gnupg
version used by gpgme from gnupg-2.1 to gnupg-2.0?
My reading of gpgme's NEWS makes me suspect that gnupg-2.1.x is not only
supported, but likely to be a superior choice. NEWS includes:
* More precise error codes are returned if GnuPG >= 2.1.8 is used.
* Fixed regression for GPGSM use with GnuPG < 2.1.
If there's a reason to stick with gnupg-2.0 for gpgme, it might be good
to add a comment to explain why.
What do you think?
Mark
>From ae3bded68efaeac6fc85c9ee97f03155d4b7df5d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ludovic=20Court=C3=A8s?= <l...@gnu.org>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 17:43:19 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: gpgme: Build against GnuPG 2.0.
* gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (gpgme)[inputs]: Change to GNUPG-2.0.
---
gnu/packages/gnupg.scm | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
index a9f1f12..4065c0f 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/gnupg.scm
@@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ libskba (working with X.509 certificates and CMS data).")
;; Needs to be propagated because gpgme.h includes gpg-error.h.
`(("libgpg-error" ,libgpg-error)))
(inputs
- `(("gnupg" ,gnupg)
+ `(("gnupg" ,gnupg-2.0)
("libassuan" ,libassuan)))
(arguments '(#:make-flags '("GPG=gpg2")))
(home-page "http://www.gnupg.org/related_software/gpgme/";)
--
2.9.2
