Re: gnupg problem
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Bushnell, BSG <tb@becket.net> writes:
Thomas> No, you're wrong. The mailcrypt front end, for example, works
Thomas> with both. And that's the case we are talking about.
OK, so it'll work for now. But you run the (unnecessary, IMHO) risk of
future breakage.
Assuming for a second that we don't already know what's going to happen
to mailcrypt (i.e. it now only supports gnupg), what if mailcrypt drops
support for the old-style pgp. Then should pgp stop providing "pgp
implementation"? No. Just because mailcrypt doesn't support old pgp
doesn't make pgp less of a pgp implementation. What we would need to
do, then, is to make another "pgp implementation"-like virtual package,
call it "pgp implementation1". Now suppose that PGP comes out with
version 6, which has a different command-line interface. mailcrypt adds
support for it. We make a virtual package called "pgp implementation2".
And before long, gnupg provides "pgp implementation", "pgp
implementation 1", "pgp implementation2", "pgp implementation3", ...
And that's just for mailcrypt, not to mention the other pgp front ends,
which might work with just old pgp, or old pgp and gnupg, or ...
There are 2^3 - 1 = 7 possible sets of compatabilities for the front
ends if we only have 3 different interfaces, so we would potentially
need 7 virtual packages.
In short, this is a bad idea.
- --
Hubert Chan <hackerhue@geek.com> - http://www.geocities.com/hubertchan/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/71FDA37F
Fingerprint: 6CC5 822D 2E55 494C 81DD 6F2C 6518 54DF 71FD A37F
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Please encrypt *all* e-mail to me.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE7MimhZRhU33H9o38RAq0LAKC8CZWPjqdHGGlYIduy24PxU+GxhQCeK2xb
b3zyNIRinbAwaHSn+uxNjp8=
=/w8A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: