[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: new developers wait for GNUPG (was: PAM still a goal for slink)

Some time around  Thu, 03 Sep 1998 11:38:00 +0200, 
         joost@pc47.mpn.cp.philips.com wrote:
 > On Wed, 2 Sep 1998 jdassen@wi.leidenuniv.nl wrote:
 > > Anyway, most (all?) of the code that must be changed to handle GPG is in t
 > he
 > > "dpgk-dev" package; it should be fairly simple to find out where it
 > > currently invokes PGP. Probably the correct thing to do would be to use GP
 > G
 > > by default if it is available, and fall back to PGP when it isn't (or when
 > > an override flag is given).
 > >From man 1 dpkg-source:
 >        -ppgp-command
 >               When dpkg-buildpackage needs to execute PGP to sign
 >               a source control (.dsc) file or a .changes file  it
 >               will  run pgp-command (searching the PATH if neces
 >               sary) instead of pgp.  pgp-command will get all the
 >               arguments  that  pgp  would have done.  pgp-command
 >               should  not  contain  spaces  or  any  other  shell
 >               metacharacters.
 > Maybe this is enough for now to be able to use gpg?
No, because gpg has different API from gpg.  Still, modifying dpkg to support 
gpg should not be hard at all.
Proudly running Debian Linux! Linux vs. Windows is a no-Win situation....
Igor Grobman           igor@debian.org                 igor@igoria.net 

Reply to: