Should gpg use alternatives?

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at
Sun Nov 7 19:29:11 UTC 2010

On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 05:20:02PM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Should gpg 1.x be installed as /usr/bin/gpg1, gpg 2.x be installed as
> /usr/bin/gpg2 (as is already the case), and /usr/bin/gpg replaced
> with a symlink managed by alternatives?
If you check the list archives, this has come up before and the answer was
no.  gpg1 and gpg2 are intended to provide separate functionality.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the devel mailing list