Re: [PATCH 0/5] gnupg: Update to 2.2.27

[Adolf Belka <adolf.belka@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3570 bytes --]

Hi Michael,


On 06/04/2021 12:38, Michael Tremer wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Thank you for working on this.
> 
>> On 4 Apr 2021, at 12:10, Adolf Belka <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>
>> This is the patch series for the update of gnupg from  the legacy 1.4
>> branch to the LTS 2.2 branch.
>>
>> Required for build and use are
>> libassuan  New requirement for 2.2 branch - change from addon to Core program
>> libksba    New requirement for 2.2 branch - new install
>> npth       New requirement for 2.2 branch - new install
>>
>> pinentry not required for build. Is required for some uses of gnupg such
>> as when providing passwords. This does not apply the the IPFire use cases.
>>
>> Trying to update gpgme with the old 1.4 branch gnupg resulted in various
>> fails. Was looking for files that were not present.
>> Updating gpgme with 2.2 branch  of gnupg was successful.
>>
>> The iso created from the build of all the changes from this patch series
>> was installed in my vm testbed. Keys successfully imported. Package lists
>> successfully read and put into pakfire wui page. Several addons installed
>> successfully. Packages had signatures successfully verified.
>> My testing indicates that gnupg 2.2 branch is successfully working in
>> IPFire in place of the 1.4 branch
> 
> That sounds very good.
I was surprised how well it went after I had sorted out all the additional dependency programs.
> 
> What is the migration path? Can the new version read the old key store or do we have to do something about this first?
My testing was only for installing from scratch using the iso. That seemed to work fine and successfully imported the keys, created the list of available packages and then successfully verified the addons I installed.
As this is a big change it definitely would be good to have other people test out that what I found is generally applicable.

For migration with the Core Update, I don't know what might be needed. I was not able to test this out on my vm testbed.
If the changes are merged then I, and others, could do an upgrade to unstable which should highlight if there are any problems with the migration for a Core Update.
I don't have any other ideas beyond that for testing out the migration path required.

Regards,
Adolf.
> 
> -Michael
> 
>>
>>
>> Adolf Belka (5):
>>   gnupg: Update to 2.2.27
>>   libassuan: Convert from addon to core program
>>   libksba: required for gnupg 2.2 series
>>   npth: required for gnupg 2.2 series
>>   gpgme: Update to 1.15.1
>>
>> config/rootfiles/common/gnupg                 | 107 ++++++++++--
>> .../rootfiles/{packages => common}/libassuan  |   0
>> config/rootfiles/common/libksba               |   9 +
>> config/rootfiles/common/npth                  |   7 +
>> config/rootfiles/packages/gpgme               | 162 +++++++++++++++++-
>> lfs/gnupg                                     |   4 +-
>> lfs/gpgme                                     |   6 +-
>> lfs/libassuan                                 |   6 -
>> lfs/libksba                                   |  79 +++++++++
>> lfs/npth                                      |  79 +++++++++
>> make.sh                                       |   2 +
>> 11 files changed, 434 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>> rename config/rootfiles/{packages => common}/libassuan (100%)
>> create mode 100644 config/rootfiles/common/libksba
>> create mode 100644 config/rootfiles/common/npth
>> create mode 100644 lfs/libksba
>> create mode 100644 lfs/npth
>>
>> -- 
>> 2.31.1
>>
>