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

Re: enigmail will break with TB upgrade



On 2018-09-27 17:05:08, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Am 27.09.18 um 04:52 schrieb Antoine Beaupré:
> [...]
>> Enigmail's work, then, might be better targeted at helping the folks in
>> stretch, although I do wonder how we could possibly upgrade GnuPG 2
>> (required to get a new version of Enigmail compatible with TB 60) in
>> jessie without causing all sorts of unrelated trouble. Keep in mind that
>> Jessie still runs the old 2.0 release instead of the (recommended) 2.1
>> (stretch) or 2.2 (buster) releases.
>
> Just for the record. I have backported the Buster version of Enigmail to
> Stretch and it works simply by removing the versioned dependency on
> gnupg2. So far I haven't noticed any issues.

But stretch has GnuPG 2.1 and it's the default gpg binary. jessie will
be a whole other story...

dkg was saying the reason Enigmail used openpgp.js is because gpg was
outdated somehow on some platforms:

 * instead, i realized that the OpenPGP.js node package was only needed
   by enigmail for a few things, in particular to avoid needing a newer
   version of GnuPG.

 * there were a few small changes that needed to be made to GnuPG to
   make enigmail pass its test suites properly without OpenPGP.js, so i
   got them made upstream in GnuPG.

 * then i stripped OpenPGP.js from enigmail, and bumped enigmail's
   dependency on GnuPG.

Source: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=909000

I wonder what that was all about...

Was the solution for stretch finally to remove enigmail from stable and
use backports?

A.

-- 
Le pouvoir n'est pas à conquérir, il est à détruire
                        - Jean-François Brient, de la servitude moderne


Reply to: