Hi,

> On 29 Mar 2021, at 21:51, Adolf Belka <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Michael,
> 
> On 29/03/2021 22:22, Michael Tremer wrote:
>> Hello,
>> As far as I know we do not use any exotic functionality.
>> The main (and maybe even only) user is pakfire, if that works we are fine. If that breaks, we are a bit screwed :)
> Understand. At the worst we just stay where we are on the 1.4 classic branch.
> Based on the input from Peter I did some searching and may have found some command line options related to the pinentry aspect that disable it.

Pinentry will probably be required to be there as a build and runtime dependency, but we are not using it.

> I will try to build and if successful, I will install the built iso and see how pakfire works for addon installs. If it works okay then I will provide a patch for wider review and testing. If it doesn't then I will leave things as they are for now.

Importing the keys and validating the packages should not have changed. If it did, a couple of command line switch updates will do it. So we should be able to tackle this :)

-Michael

> Thanks and regards,
> Adolf.
>> -Michael
>>> On 27 Mar 2021, at 21:39, Adolf Belka <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Peter,
>>> 
>>> On 27/03/2021 21:11, Peter Müller wrote:
>>>> Hello Adolf,
>>>> hello development folks,
>>>> sorry for my tardy reply.
>>> No problems. I know you have been and are very busy people.
>>>>> Is IPFire using the 1.4 Branch because there is some historic requirement for the older insecure keys.
>>>> (Assuming this was a question:) To my knowledge, we do not have key material in operation that would not
>>>> be supported by GnuPG 2.x - the "classic" branch simply is more lightweight than the 2.x branch.
>>>> The last time I looked at this, GnuPG 2.x required some flavour of the "pinentry" helper for entering
>>>> passphrases, and won't compile without. Since there is no manual interaction on a firewall, "pinentry"
>>>> is useless, but I was unable to work out how to omit it in GnuPG 2.x .
>>> Thanks for the heads up on this.
>>>> Things could have been changed, meanwhile. Perhaps this is now possible, so if you have some spare time
>>>> to look at this, go ahead. :-)
>>> I will give it a try. The worst that can happen is that I can't get it working and we stay with the status quo which is working currently.
>>>> Thank you very much in advance for your efforts - and all your patches of the last weeks.
>>> I am glad to help where I can.I know I can't help you with the real core stuff, my capabilities aren't sufficient but I can generally help with providing update patches on anything that I find has newer versions.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Adolf
>>> 
>>>> Thanks, and best regards,
>>>> Peter Müller