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

Bug#237216: dpkg-dev: dpkg-genchanges can't PGP sign anymore

package dpkg-dev
reassign 237216 pgpgpg

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 22:58, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 12:29:34PM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > What version of PGP are you using?  Javier, what version of PGP are
> > *you* using?
> Funny, I was about to answer:
*snip: pgp 2.6.3a-9*
> But then I realised:
*snip: pgpgpg 0.13-6 through pgp diversion*

> So maybe this is a bug in pgpgpg and the fix should be reverted.
As I (now) understand this.  When dpkg-buildpackage calls gpg it needs
to insert a blank line, but when it calls pgp, it does not.  If it is
called with pgp=pgpgpg the blank line *is* needed because it's really
talking to gpg.

> I see two solutions here:
> 1.- reassign the bug to pgpgpg and revert my patch
This I have done.  dpkg_1.10.20 reverts your patch and is uploaded
today.  This mail reassigns the bug to pgpgpg.

pgpgpg is supposed to be a wrapper, therefore it should emulate the
behaviour of pgp precisely, this includes blank lines and such-forth.

> 2.- have dpkg-buildpackage handle a _third_ method which is similar to
> gnupg's but when pgpgpg is installed (i.e. /etc/alternatives/pgp exists).
gah!  No.  If someone's using pgpgpg then they have a gpg setup, so they
can just use the gpg method.

> Sorry for the mistake in producing the patch. I should have verified the 
> facts better.
I tested the patch with pgpgpg as well, so didn't spot it was wrong :-)

Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: