Archives
Archives
| From: | Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] gnupg2 only vs gnupg-1 & gnupg-2 | ||
| Date: | Sun, 27 May 2007 21:34:03 | ||
| Message-Id: | 4659F891.5020605@gentoo.org | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-dev] gnupg2 only vs gnupg-1 & gnupg-2 by "William L. Thomson Jr." |
||
| 1 | William L. Thomson Jr. napsal(a): |
| 2 | > This has sparked the following open bugs, and countless more closed |
| 3 | > ones :( |
| 4 | > |
| 5 | > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153496 |
| 6 | > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=160302 |
| 7 | > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164523 |
| 8 | > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=171871 |
| 9 | > |
| 10 | > Probably more open bugs, those are just what I stumbled across while |
| 11 | > looking for OTHER things :) |
| 12 | |
| 13 | M'kay... about 3 gnome apps have issues w/ gnupg-2. Seriously, I could |
| 14 | care less; their problem. Maybe upstream will wake up sometimes, or |
| 15 | what's the horrible issue with porting those, beyond 'oh we don't care, |
| 16 | use gnupg-1 because the legacy feeling is oh so great'? |
| 17 | |
| 18 | Shrug. |
| 19 | |
| 20 | |
| 21 | -- |
| 22 | Best regards, |
| 23 | |
| 24 | Jakub Moc |
| 25 | mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 26 | GPG signature: |
| 27 | http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 28 | Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 29 | |
| 30 | ... still no signature ;) |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] gnupg2 only vs gnupg-1 & gnupg-2 | "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o> |