Bug 200008
| Summary: | mail/spamassassin sa-update depending on gpg executable even when the option GNUPG2 is selected during make config | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | Trond Endrestøl <Trond.Endrestol> | ||||
| Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | Adam Weinberger <adamw> | ||||
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | Flags: | bugzilla:
maintainer-feedback?
(adamw) |
||||
| Priority: | --- | ||||||
| Version: | Latest | ||||||
| Hardware: | Any | ||||||
| OS: | Any | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
(In reply to Trond.Endrestol from comment #0) Sorry for the noise, Just disregard this PR. I had both security/gnupg1 and security/gnupg installed along with mail/spamassassin. The latter has since been reconfigured to depend on security/gnupg, thus making security/gnupg1 obsolete. The removal of security/gnupg1 also removed the /usr/local/bin/gpg symlink making sa-update complain. Some days later I reinstalled security/gnupg after upgrading the system from stable/9 to stable/10, and now all is well. Or maybe this PR is somewhat misplaced, as security/gnupg1 and security/gnupg should watch out for each other and in particular watch out for the /usr/local/bin/gpg symlink. At any rate, I guess the morale is to reinstall security/gnupg after removing security/gnupg1. The pkg-install for gnupg* should already be looking out for the gpg symlink, though that depends on the age of your ports tree. I'm glad the issue is essentially resolved for you. I'm going to close out the PR at this point. |
Created attachment 156442 [details] Patch for sa-update whenever the option GNUPG2 is selected during make config Please patch sa-update to look for the gpg2 executable whenever the option GNUPG2 is selected during make config.