gnupg21 @2.1.12_0: install symlinks for "gpg" and "gpgv"

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

It would be nice if this port installed symlinks for gpg and gpgv. Users could invoke the suffixless binaries as they’re used to, and gnupg21 could satisfy bin and path dependencies like the one in keybase.

The attached patch​ simply imitates the “package” phase of the ​current ArchLinux package. I made it against @2.1.12_0, but I’d recommend committing it as part of the 2.1.13 update.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

install suffixless symlinks

[roederja]

The reason why gpg 2.* is not installed as gpg is that you can install it alongside gpg 1.* . This may be less relevant now though.

[Ionic (Mihai Moldovan)]

Given that we conflict gnupg, gnupg2, gpg-agent and gnupg21, creating such symlinks in gnupg21 is okay.

We can't do this in gnupg2 because users can have both gnupg and gnupg2 installed, though, so the behavior of the gpg and gpgv binaries will be unreproducible without knowing the system state first. Not sure we want that, larry?

[roederja]

No sym link is required if we want this. There is a configure switch to install the binary as just gpg. I would keep everything as is though. Changing it will just break things.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Replying to jann@…:

No sym link is required if we want this. There is a configure switch to install the binary as just gpg.

Doesn’t that option cause the build to NOT install gpg2? I don’t think that’s what any of us want.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Replying to ionic@…:

We can't do this in gnupg2 because users can have both gnupg and gnupg2 installed, though, so the behavior of the gpg and gpgv binaries will be unreproducible without knowing the system state first. Not sure we want that, larry?

I hadn’t considered that. I wouldn’t call that state of affairs unreproducible (gnupg and gnupg21 would always install gpg and gnupg2 would never do so), but it certainly could be confusing. It’s easy for someone to understand why 1.x installs gpg and 2.x installs gpg2; it would be harder to understand why 1.x and 2.1.x installed gpg but 2.0.x did not. I’d understand if you wanted to close this at wontfix.

(My personal motivation is getting keybase working with something that isn’t gnupg, but perhaps it’d be better to patch that instead of this.)

[roederja]

So keybase only works if the binary (or symlink) is called gpg ?

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

The Keybase software itself can find “gpg2” (and actually ​prefers it), but our keybase port currently has a bin:gpg:gnupg dependency.

[l2dy (Zero King)]

In 076b183ffbe190f57ed3bd6764d38b23a290ee63/macports-ports:

gnupg21: update to 2.1.23

Fixes: #51650

[l2dy (Zero King)]

Since 2.1.23:

• gpg: "gpg" is now installed as "gpg" and not anymore as "gpg2". If needed, the new configure option --enable-gpg-is-gpg2 can be used to revert this.