Tim Zingelman <tez%netbsd.org@localhost> writes: > Is the need for gnupg 1.x only for the script pkg-vuln-update.sh ? > If so I added this patch locally and have used the script a couple of times > since with no complaints... (Not directed at you - I didn't say anything because I thought all the naming churn had been reverted.) This is a great discussion for after the branch :-) (Only things that be clearly expected not to cause trouble are ok in careful mode, and flipping names of things with dependencies is over the line.)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature