From my understanding of the stable gnupg v1.2.# stream and the development version 1.9.# stream, they should be able to co-exist side-by-side (e.g. this is why the binary is gpg2 instead of gpg). Would be be possible to split the ebuilds into app-crypt/gnupg and app-crypt/gnupg2? The traditional gpg component of the 1.9 brach has several glaring problems, notably the lack of working properly with mainstream keyservers. From my reading, it sounds like both versions could co-exist peacefully. Also from a stability and security standpoint even those of us who like to use ~x86 would still like the peace of mind that our gpg is proven and secure. Thanks for considering this issue. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
Wanted to tack on this post: http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gpa-dev/2004-January/001653.html The gnupg guys themselves recommend running them in parallel.
"Also from a stability and security standpoint even those of us who like to use ~x86 would still like the peace of mind that our gpg is proven and secure." I don't understand what you mean, the 1.9.x releases are hardmasked. I'll try and find someone willing to maintain a gnupg2 package :)
Huh... you're right. It is listed in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask but it sure tries to install anyway. I'll have to look and see why Gentoo's buildling that for me. My system's been acting funny lately. Sorry for the bother -- i should have looked at the package masks first.
