Mailing List Archive

On Friday 15 October 2004 10:55, Tarragon M. Allen wrote:
> I am extremely annoyed at someone in the Gentoo team deciding to just plain
> delete "newpg" from the archives without so much as a warning as far as I
> can see except for some obscure references in the bug tracker which I only
> found AFTER gpg-agent stopped working.
>
> So, now that newpg has been removed, where the hell do I get gpg-agent?
>
> Note that this has broken decryption in Kmail for me on a WORK MACHINE,
> which means that it's impeding my ability to do my job right now. Not
> happy.

I see that somewhere they've declared "newpg is dead, use gnupg 1.9". That's
all well anc good, except that GUNPG 1.9.x is HARD MASKED.

So, this effectively means that for the average Joe user who wants a "stable"
system, there is no gpg-agent?

Good one guys.

t
--
http://moto-coda.org/public.gpg.key

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 2:03 pm, Tarragon M. Allen wrote:
> On Friday 15 October 2004 10:55, Tarragon M. Allen wrote:
> > I am extremely annoyed at someone in the Gentoo team deciding to
> > just plain delete "newpg" from the archives without so much as a
> > warning as far as I can see except for some obscure references in
> > the bug tracker which I only found AFTER gpg-agent stopped working.
> >
> > So, now that newpg has been removed, where the hell do I get
> > gpg-agent?
> >
> > Note that this has broken decryption in Kmail for me on a WORK
> > MACHINE, which means that it's impeding my ability to do my job
> > right now. Not happy.
>
> I see that somewhere they've declared "newpg is dead, use gnupg 1.9".
> That's all well anc good, except that GUNPG 1.9.x is HARD MASKED.
>
> So, this effectively means that for the average Joe user who wants a
> "stable" system, there is no gpg-agent?
>
> Good one guys.
>
> t

I had a similar problem. even tried out 1.9, but it doesnt play nice
because kmail expects parts of the older version for general use. The
s/mime thing, while great if it works, is a bit of a bust for kmail at
this stage.

Even the kde kmail site that tells you how to do it admits its not very
good. *Sigh*.

My sympathies.

Does anyone know if this is fixed in kde 3.3.1?

--

Mike: "The Fourth Dimension is a shambles?"
Bernie: "Nobody ever empties the ashtrays. People are SO
inconsiderate."
-- Gary Trudeau, "Doonesbury"


--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On October 15, 2004 12:13 am, Glenn Enright wrote:
> I had a similar problem. even tried out 1.9, but it doesnt play nice
> because kmail expects parts of the older version for general use. The
> s/mime thing, while great if it works, is a bit of a bust for kmail at
> this stage.
>
> Even the kde kmail site that tells you how to do it admits its not very
> good. *Sigh*.
>
> My sympathies.
>
> Does anyone know if this is fixed in kde 3.3.1?

oo! i know!
...it still doesn't work. the problem isn't kde though, it's the lack of
gpg-agent.

--
forgive your enemies, but never forget their names
- john f. kennedy

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Friday 15 October 2004 02:03, Tarragon M. Allen wrote:
> I see that somewhere they've declared "newpg is dead, use gnupg 1.9".
> That's all well anc good, except that GUNPG 1.9.x is HARD MASKED.
>
> So, this effectively means that for the average Joe user who wants a
> "stable" system, there is no gpg-agent?

gnupg-1.2.6 does everything kmail is expecting, apparently.

--
Mike Williams

On Friday 15 October 2004 20:28, Mike Williams wrote:
> On Friday 15 October 2004 02:03, Tarragon M. Allen wrote:
> > I see that somewhere they've declared "newpg is dead, use gnupg 1.9".
> > That's all well anc good, except that GUNPG 1.9.x is HARD MASKED.
> >
> > So, this effectively means that for the average Joe user who wants a
> > "stable" system, there is no gpg-agent?
>
> gnupg-1.2.6 does everything kmail is expecting, apparently.

Except that it doesn't provide gpg-agent.

Can someone please mail be a copy of the old newpg ebuild?

After spending four hours on Friday recompiling kdepim, gnupg, and various
other related packages, I still don't have working decryption in kmail and am
rather frustrated and annoyed at the Gentoo developers involved for forcing
this situation on me without providing a workable, tested and documented
solution.

In my view, gpg-agent is a very important service, up there perhaps with
ssh-agent. I believe It was negligent to remove this without ensuring that
replacement packages were available: gnupg 1.9.x is still hard masked.
Furthermore, expecting people to entrust their encryption duties to _alpha_
software (according to the GnuPG website) is ludicrous.

t
--
http://moto-coda.org/public.gpg.key

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Monday 18 October 2004 12:02, Tarragon M. Allen wrote:
> > gnupg-1.2.6 does everything kmail is expecting, apparently.
>
> Except that it doesn't provide gpg-agent.
>
> Can someone please mail be a copy of the old newpg ebuild?

Anyone?

t
--
http://moto-coda.org/public.gpg.key

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

You can get the newpg's ebuild from the gentoo's cvs repository:
http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/app-crypt/newpg/?root=gentoo-x86

Alin.

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:02:02 +1000, Tarragon M. Allen
<gentoo-user@moto-coda.org> wrote:
> On Friday 15 October 2004 20:28, Mike Williams wrote:
>
>
> > On Friday 15 October 2004 02:03, Tarragon M. Allen wrote:
> > > I see that somewhere they've declared "newpg is dead, use gnupg 1.9".
> > > That's all well anc good, except that GUNPG 1.9.x is HARD MASKED.
> > >
> > > So, this effectively means that for the average Joe user who wants a
> > > "stable" system, there is no gpg-agent?
> >
> > gnupg-1.2.6 does everything kmail is expecting, apparently.
>
> Except that it doesn't provide gpg-agent.
>
> Can someone please mail be a copy of the old newpg ebuild?
>
> After spending four hours on Friday recompiling kdepim, gnupg, and various
> other related packages, I still don't have working decryption in kmail and am
> rather frustrated and annoyed at the Gentoo developers involved for forcing
> this situation on me without providing a workable, tested and documented
> solution.
>
> In my view, gpg-agent is a very important service, up there perhaps with
> ssh-agent. I believe It was negligent to remove this without ensuring that
> replacement packages were available: gnupg 1.9.x is still hard masked.
> Furthermore, expecting people to entrust their encryption duties to _alpha_
> software (according to the GnuPG website) is ludicrous.
>
>
>
> t
> --
> http://moto-coda.org/public.gpg.key
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list