HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

[Vasil Dimov]

On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:44:00AM +0900, Jun Kuriyama wrote:
> At Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:28:21 -0800,
> Doug Barton wrote:
[...]
> > What might make sense is for the gnupg 2.x port to install a gpg
> > symlink to gpg2. I've done that on my own system for convenience sake.
> > That will get hairy if the user tries to install gnupg 1.x though.
> > Both gnupg ports will need logic to handle what to do with the symlink
> > if the other port is installed.
> 
> Seems fine.  Like this?

Just my 2 cents:

-		NLS "Native Language Support" on \
[...]
+OPTIONS=	NLS "Include National Language Support" on \

I believe the N in NLS stands for Native.
 
[...]
+verify:	checksum
+	gpg --verify ${DISTDIR}/${DISTNAME}${EXTRACT_SUFX}.sig

You are referencing the old gpg executable here (or the link in which
case it does not matter) here.
Is this intentional? Shouldn't it be gpg2?

-- 
Vasil Dimov
gro.DSBeerF at dv
%
Westheimer's Discovery:
        A couple of months in the laboratory can
        frequently save a couple of hours in the library.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 155 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20061213/26bdc126/attachment.pgp