-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hello,
pygpgme is dead since 2013, I've wrote and applied some patches to make it to work with latest gnupg2/gpgme stack, but since March it FTBFS (so I added `|| :` for tests). I'm planning to retire pygpgme from F27 right before branching. So just sending email to tell this to everyone.
Affected packages * alot[0] * epylog[1] (no response since March) * fedora-business-cards[2] (no response since March) * sigul-server[3] (puietrwijk responded on June, but no progress so far) * yum (I can't really find BZ ticket, but I'm in contact with yum maintainers/upstream to deal with this problem)
For those who care about EL, gpgme might get updated[4] soon, but I can't guarantee anything.
[0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1473647 [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433369 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433370 [3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433367 [4] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1412310 - -- - -Igor Gnatenko
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Igor Gnatenko ignatenkobrain@fedoraproject.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hello,
pygpgme is dead since 2013, I've wrote and applied some patches to make it to work with latest gnupg2/gpgme stack, but since March it FTBFS (so I added `|| :` for tests). I'm planning to retire pygpgme from F27 right before branching. So just sending email to tell this to everyone.
Affected packages
- alot[0]
- epylog[1] (no response since March)
- fedora-business-cards[2] (no response since March)
- sigul-server[3] (puietrwijk responded on June, but no progress so
far)
- yum (I can't really find BZ ticket, but I'm in contact with yum
maintainers/upstream to deal with this problem)
For those who care about EL, gpgme might get updated[4] soon, but I can't guarantee anything.
librepo is also affected, as it uses pygpgme in the Python bindings. That needs to be ported too.
On pe, 21 heinä 2017, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Igor Gnatenko ignatenkobrain@fedoraproject.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hello,
pygpgme is dead since 2013, I've wrote and applied some patches to make it to work with latest gnupg2/gpgme stack, but since March it FTBFS (so I added `|| :` for tests). I'm planning to retire pygpgme from F27 right before branching. So just sending email to tell this to everyone.
Affected packages
- alot[0]
- epylog[1] (no response since March)
- fedora-business-cards[2] (no response since March)
- sigul-server[3] (puietrwijk responded on June, but no progress so
far)
- yum (I can't really find BZ ticket, but I'm in contact with yum
maintainers/upstream to deal with this problem)
For those who care about EL, gpgme might get updated[4] soon, but I can't guarantee anything.
librepo is also affected, as it uses pygpgme in the Python bindings. That needs to be ported too.
Samba AD is affected as well as we use both gpgme and python2-pygpgme.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 15:36 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On pe, 21 heinä 2017, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Igor Gnatenko ignatenkobrain@fedoraproject.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hello,
pygpgme is dead since 2013, I've wrote and applied some patches to make it to work with latest gnupg2/gpgme stack, but since March it FTBFS (so I added `|| :` for tests). I'm planning to retire pygpgme from F27 right before branching. So just sending email to tell this to everyone.
Affected packages
- alot[0]
- epylog[1] (no response since March)
- fedora-business-cards[2] (no response since March)
- sigul-server[3] (puietrwijk responded on June, but no progress
so far)
- yum (I can't really find BZ ticket, but I'm in contact with yum
maintainers/upstream to deal with this problem)
For those who care about EL, gpgme might get updated[4] soon, but I can't guarantee anything.
librepo is also affected, as it uses pygpgme in the Python bindings. That needs to be ported too.
Samba AD is affected as well as we use both gpgme and python2- pygpgme.
In build-time or runtime? Which exact package?
Note that gpgme is staying here and not planned to be removed.
-- / Alexander Bokovoy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
- -- - -Igor Gnatenko
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 08:11 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Igor Gnatenko ignatenkobrain@fedoraproject.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hello,
pygpgme is dead since 2013, I've wrote and applied some patches to make it to work with latest gnupg2/gpgme stack, but since March it FTBFS (so I added `|| :` for tests). I'm planning to retire pygpgme from F27 right before branching. So just sending email to tell this to everyone.
Affected packages
- alot[0]
- epylog[1] (no response since March)
- fedora-business-cards[2] (no response since March)
- sigul-server[3] (puietrwijk responded on June, but no progress so
far)
- yum (I can't really find BZ ticket, but I'm in contact with yum
maintainers/upstream to deal with this problem)
For those who care about EL, gpgme might get updated[4] soon, but I can't guarantee anything.
librepo is also affected, as it uses pygpgme in the Python bindings. That needs to be ported too.
No, it is build-time dependency. But thanks for pointer, I will make sure to port it.
-- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
- -- - -Igor Gnatenko
-
Alexander Bokovoy -
Igor Gnatenko -
Neal Gompa