Bug#452640: Bug#461110: please include packages from Priority: important

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 07:10:51PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 02:31:35PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> >> > Are you sure about these two?  apt has Depends on them, but they're
> >> > superflous (I verified that, see #452640).  I don't know about D-I.
> >> 
> >> debian-archive-keyring is not supurflous; apt's copy of the keyring is
> >> out of date (containing only the 2005 and 2006 keys, no key for stable,
> >> and no key for volatile) and should be removed.
> >
> > Uhm I guess this should be mentioned in #452640.  CCing.
> >
> > APT maintainers: AFAICT, there two portions of my patch that still make
> > sense: moving gnupg direct dependancy (d-a-k depends on gnupg for use in
> > its postinst, but apt doesn't), and fix the error message.
> >
> > This would allow d-a-k to stop dragging gnupg in eventually.
> 
> Please send a new and updated patch for it.
> 
> I ack to remove gnupg direct depends from apt.

Sorry I was confused.  There's no direct gnupg dependency.

This is all that's left of my original report:

-      ioprintf(ret, _("Could not execute '%s' to verify signature (is gnupg installed?)"), gpgvpath.c_str());
+      ioprintf(ret, _("Could not execute '%s' to verify signature (is gpgv installed?)"), gpgvpath.c_str());

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)