Dear maintainer The USE flags for the crypto support (S/MIME, PGP/MIME) in neomutt are named odd and kind of misleading. Currently we have crypt = traditional/inline PGP and PGP/MIME support through mod_pgp_classic backend. Calls GPG binary at runtime. gpg = traditional/inline PGP, PGP/MIME and S/MIME support through mod_pgp_gpgme and mod_smime_gpgme backends. Needs gpgme at compile time. smime = S/MIME support through mod_smime_classic backend. Calls OpenSSL binary at runtime. I suggest renaming these USE flags with the following description (names and phrasing are up to debate) gpgme = Build gpgme backend to support S/MIME, PGP/MIME and traditional/inline PGP. pgp_classic = Build classic_pgp backend to support PGP/MIME and traditional/inline PGP. smime_classic = Build classic_smime backend to support S/MIME. On your discretion you might add "uses app-crypt/gpgme library", "uses dev-libs/openssl at runtime", "uses app-crypt/gnupg at runtime" or their-like. Please note that neither the USE flag for the classic PGP nor the classic S/MIME backend pulls in its runtime dependency (app-crypt/gnupg and dev-libs/openssl, respectively). This might be intentional but I nevertheless wanted to point that out in case it's not.
Hi Is there anything I can do to help resolving this issue, e.g. supplying a patch?
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=466c3f1ed6f5219aa8f47c516be5cdd415f8a327 commit 466c3f1ed6f5219aa8f47c516be5cdd415f8a327 Author: Nicolas Bock <nicolasbock@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2017-12-02 14:28:37 +0000 Commit: Nicolas Bock <nicolasbock@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2017-12-02 14:29:10 +0000 mail-client/neomutt: Update crypto USE flags Rename the crypto USE flags to make their naming more consistent and clearer to the user. Co-Authored-By: brunoboclair@fake-box.com Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/637176 Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.13, Repoman-2.3.3 mail-client/neomutt/Manifest | 10 +++++----- mail-client/neomutt/metadata.xml | 6 ++++++ mail-client/neomutt/neomutt-9999.ebuild | 23 ++++++++++++----------- 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
Thanks for pointing out these inconsistencies. I have changed the USE flags for the 9999 ebuild and will move them into the next release of neomutt. Regarding your observation that the crypto backends don't actually pull in their runtime dependencies, I would like to investigate this issue a little further before making changes to the ebuild. Thanks for pointing this out!
> Thanks for pointing out these inconsistencies. You're welcome. Thanks to you for responding and taking care of this issue!
