Should GnuPG 1.4.x be revived?

[Chen Lei]

2010/7/13 Daniel P. Berrange <berrange at redhat.com>:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 09:57:38AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 07/13/2010 09:54 AM, Karel Klic wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > several users of Emacs and one user of Vim complained in rhbz#574406 [1]
>> > that they can no longer use their editor to open and edit gpg-encrypted
>> > files in Fedora 13.
>> >
>> > The reason is that GnuPG 1.4 was deprecated after Fedora 12 release, and
>> > GnuPG 2 was introduced to replace it. However, GnuPG 2 is not entirely
>> > compatible with GnuPG 1.4.
>> >
>> > I looked at GnuPG 2 and it seems that it would be very difficult to
>> > modify Emacs and Vim to support it. GnuPG 2 does not allow to enter a
>> > password using shell -- it needs entire terminal (as it uses ncurses
>> > program pinentry-curses).
>> > Text editors can use only shell to send a password to GnuPG.
>> >
>> > What about reviving GnuPG 1.4? It is maintained, secure, supported, and
>> > its integration into text editors is used extensively and works well. It
>> > can live alongside GnuPG 2.
>> >
>> > What do you think? Any idea how to solve this issue?
>>
>> This one really must be addressed upstream.  It's absurd that GnuPG
>> doesn't work with GNU Emacs.  If needs be, Richard Stallman is quite
>> capable of knocking the maintainers' heads together.
>
> That is certainly the good approach to get a long term solution for
> Fedora, but it isn't much use for people using Fedora 13 today who
> have broken gpg support. It sounds like a compat-gnupg14 package is
> a  reasonable approach to fixing this in Fedora 13 stable, and likely
> also Fedora 14 if  upstream don't get their act together quickly enough
> for that release.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
> --
No need to introduce a new compat-gnupg14 package, simply revive gnupg
in koji is enough.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=453

gnupg 2.x is named as gnupg2 in fedora.

Regards,
Chen Lei