cvs commit: ports/security/gnupg Makefile
Jeremy Messenger
mezz7 at cox.net
Sun Sep 2 14:16:52 PDT 2007
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 15:10:45 -0500, Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Roman Bogorodskiy wrote:
>
>> novel 2007-09-02 11:08:10 UTC
>>
>> FreeBSD ports repository
>>
>> Modified files:
>> security/gnupg Makefile
>> Log:
>> Add RUN_DEPEND on security/pinentry because gpg is almost useless
>> without it.
>>
>> PR: 115760
>> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=115760
>> Submitted by: novel
>> Approved by: maintainer timeout (1 week, linimon ok)
>>
>> Revision Changes Path
>> 1.106 +2 -1 ports/security/gnupg/Makefile
>>
>> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/security/gnupg/Makefile.diff?&r1=1.105&r2=1.106&f=h
>
> I don't think this is a good idea for a few reasons. First off, the
> gnupg port already has a pkg-message that is pretty clear about the fact
> that you need to pick a pinentry dialog. Second, I don't think that the
> pinentry port itself is a good choice in its current state. I just did a
> quick test and as far as I can tell it seems to want to build all of
> them, which means depending on QT3, and GTK 1 and 2.
>
> I sort of think that this might be reasonable if the pinentry port grew
> OPTIONS, which I would even be willing to work on if lofi thought it was
> a good idea. But I don't think the overhead of drawing all of the
> dialogs in is worth it, and I don't see an easy way of guessing which
> one the user would want by default.
>
> Can this change be backed out till there has been a little discussion?
I will have to agree with Doug as I won't be surpised if a lot of users
are going to scream. I think, get it depends on pinentry-curses by default
would be wise thing to do.
Cheers,
Mezz
> Doug
--
mezz7 at cox.net - mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team - FreeBSD Multimedia Hat (ports, not src)
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome at FreeBSD.org
http://wiki.freebsd.org/multimedia - multimedia at FreeBSD.org
More information about the cvs-all
mailing list