The GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) upstream team maintains three branches of development: 1.4 ("classic"), 2.0 ("stable"), and 2.1 ("modern").
They differ in various ways: software architecture, supported algorithms, network transport mechanisms, protocol versions, development activity, co-installability, etc.
Debian currently ships two versions of GnuPG in every maintained suite
-- in particular, /usr/bin/gpg has historically always been provided
by the "classic" branch.
That's going to change!
Debian unstable will soon be moving to the "modern" branch for providing
/usr/bin/gpg. This will give several advantages for Debian and its
users in the future, but it will require a transition. Hopefully we can
make it a smooth one.
What are the benefits?
Compared to "classic", The "modern" branch has:
- updated crypto (including elliptic curves)
- componentized architecture (e.g. libraries, some daemonized processes)
- improved key storage
- better network access (including talking to keyservers over tor)
- stronger defaults
- more active upstream development
- safer info representation (e.g. no more key IDs, fingerprints easier to copy-and-paste)
If you want to try this out, the changes are already made in experimental. Please experiment!
What does this mean for end users?
If you're an end user and you don't use GnuPG directly, you shouldn't notice much of a change once the packages start to move through the rest of the archive.
Even if you do use GnuPG regularly, you shouldn't notice too much of a difference. One of the main differences is that all access to your secret key will be handled through gpg-agent, which should be automatically launched as needed. This means that operations like signing and decryption will cause gpg-agent to prompt the the user to unlock any locked keys directly, rather than gpg itself prompting the user.
If you have an existing keyring, you may also notice a difference based on a change of how your public keys are managed, though again this transition should ideally be smooth enough that you won't notice unless you care to investigate more deeply.
If you use GnuPG regularly, you might want to read the NEWS file that ships with GnuPG and related packages for updates that should help you through the transition.
If you use GnuPG in a language other than English, please install the
gnupg-l10n package, which contains the localization/translation files.
For versions where those files are split out of the main package,
gnupg explicitly Recommends: gnupg-l10n already, so it should be
brought in for new installations by default.
If you have an archive of old data that depends on known-broken
algorithms, PGP3 keys, or other deprecated material, you'll need to have
"classic" GnuPG around to access it. That will be provided in the
gnupg1 package
What does this mean for package maintainers?
If you maintain a package that depends on gnupg: be aware that the
gnupg package in debian is going through this transition.
A few general thoughts:
If your package
Depends: gnupgfor signature verification only, you might prefer to have itDepends: gpgvinstead.gpgvis a much simpler tool that the full-blown GnuPG suite, and should be easier to manage. I'm happy to help with such a transition (we've made it recently withaptalready)If your package
Depends: gnupgand expects~/.gnupg/to be laid out in a certain way, that's almost certainly going to break at some point.~/.gnupg/is GnuPG's internal storage, and it's not recommended to rely on any specific data structures there, as they may change.gpgoffers commands like--export,--import, and--deletefor manipulating its persistent storage. please use them instead!If your package depends on parsing or displaying
gpg's output for the user, please make sure you use its special machine-readable form (--with-colons). Parsing the human-readable text is not advised and may change from version to version.
If you maintain a package that depends on gnupg2 and tries to use
gpg2 instead of gpg, that should stay ok. However, at some point
it'd be nice to get rid of /usr/bin/gpg2 and just have one expected
binary (gpg). So you can help with that:
Look for places where your package expects
gpg2and make it trygpginstead. If you can make your code fall back cleanlyChange your dependencies to indicate
gnupg (>= 2)Patch
lintianto encourage other people to make this switch ;)
What specifically needs to happen?
The last major step for this transition was renaming the source package
for "classic" GnuPG to be gnupg1. This transition is currently in the
ftp-master's NEW queue. Once it makes it through that queue, and both
gnupg1 and gnupg2 have been in experimental for a few days without
reports of dangerous breakage, we'll upload both gnupg1 and gnupg2
to unstable.
We'll also need to do some triage on the BTS, reassigning some reports which are really only relevant for the "classic" branch.
Please report bugs via the BTS as usual! You're also welcome to ask questions and make suggestions on #debian-gnupg on irc.oftc.net, or to mail the Debian GnuPG packaging team at pkg-gnupg-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org.
Happy hacking!
Tags: gnupg