Should gpg use alternatives?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Fedora Development List <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Should gpg use alternatives?
From: Sam Varshavchik <mrsam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2010 17:20:02 -0400
Delivered-to: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

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 asymlink managed by alternatives?

Attachment: pgptnomvw1NeB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should gpg use alternatives?
  - From: Toshio Kuratomi

Prev by Date: Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland
Next by Date: Re: Ubuntu moving towards Wayland
Previous by thread: fedora 14: pulseaudio eating cpu and memory without reason...
Next by thread: Re: Should gpg use alternatives?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Fedora Announce] [Fedora Kernel] [Fedora Testing] [Fedora Formulas] [Fedora PHP Devel] [Kernel Development] [Fedora Legacy] [Fedora Maintainers] [Fedora Desktop] [PAM] [Red Hat Development] [Gimp] [Yosemite News]

Powered by Linux