1 |
On Sunday 23 April 2006 02:17 pm, Mick wrote: |
2 |
> On 23/04/06, lordsauronthegreat@×××××.com <lordsauronthegreat@×××××.com> |
3 |
wrote: |
4 |
> > I've been trying to find why I am unable to use GnuPG-agent to sign my |
5 |
> > messages in KMail, and rather have to type in a password in all the time |
6 |
> > through KGPG. The problem is that the GnuPG agent in the x86 area is |
7 |
> > version 1.4.2.2, yet KMail demands verison 1.9 |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > I don't think it wise to change to ~x86, yet I still would like to use |
10 |
> > GnuPG's agent. I think my options are as such: |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > 1) Download version 1.9 from GnuPG's website and install it. Why |
13 |
> > haven't I done this? I don't know how to install something in Gentoo |
14 |
> > without it being as simple as emerge. I don't know how to install from a |
15 |
> > file on the hard drive. |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > 2) Forget KMail and signing my messages and go back to GMail. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > 3) Continue typing in my password every time I send a email. |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > 4) Hack my way through some older versions of KMail and rip out the |
22 |
> > demand for a new version of GnuPG and replace it with the older part of |
23 |
> > KMail that could work with 1.4. Not a fun idea, 'cause I want to go do |
24 |
> > other things. |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> > I find it curious that such a problem is living in current source |
27 |
> > repository for Gentoo. I'm positive this isn't intentional, but at very |
28 |
> > least I'd like to know if anything's being done to fix it. Plus, if |
29 |
> > GnuPG 1.9 is so experimental, then how can KMail need 1.9? It makes no |
30 |
> > sense to me... |
31 |
> |
32 |
> I've added 1.9 in /etc/portage/package.keywords like so: |
33 |
> ========================== |
34 |
> =app-crypt/gpg-agent-1.9.19 ~x86 |
35 |
> =dev-libs/libksba-0.9.12 ~x86 |
36 |
> =dev-libs/libassuan-0.6.10 ~x86 |
37 |
> ========================== |
38 |
> and emerged gpg-agent. I think that would be the easiest way to |
39 |
> achieve what you want. |
40 |
|
41 |
So I did some hunting and somewhat successfully fixed it. However, it now |
42 |
gives me this output which I think could become problematic in the future: |
43 |
|
44 |
--- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: |
45 |
=dev-libs/libassuan-0.6.10 ~x86 |
46 |
--- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: |
47 |
=dev-libs/libksba-0.9.12 ~x86 |
48 |
--- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: |
49 |
=app-crypt/gpg-agent-1.9.19 ~x86 |
50 |
|
51 |
This isn't good. It's emerging the stuff now, but I want to get rid of this |
52 |
(the right way, not the it's-still-broken-but-we're-pretending-it's-not way). |
53 |
|
54 |
Anyone know what I did wrong? |