EasyGnuPG

[Daniel Villarreal]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

>> [I] use gpg2 on the [CL] whereas [doco] seems to show gpg. 
>> https://gnupg.org/gph/en/manual.html#AEN111
> 
> Depending ... the gnupg 2.x executable is still called 'gpg'. I 
> guess it depends on if the distributor wants to keep easy backwards
> compatibility. On archlinux,.. only one gnupg package ... The
> executable is called gpg...Regards, Viktor

"pgp --version" and "pgp2 --version" indeed showed different results
on my system. Hmm. I can't help but wonder if it's such a big deal, so
long as I'm otherwise following best practice and using the software
as appropriately as I can, but I figure I'm on the right track by
using gpg2 on the CL.


- -- 
Daniel Villarreal
http://www.youcanlinux.org
youcanlinux at gmail.com
PGP key 2F6E 0DC3 85E2 5EC0 DA03  3F5B F251 8938 A83E 7B49
https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF2518938A83E7B49

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJW+fxGAAoJEPJRiTioPntJy4oH/3B1uosavvq0B5QRk1/KBgZR
hRNRV9wHnZR0BVLqfgno/6P6MvqSMsQodZ9pVyvrjgNlICZ18Yunpj8k2iFFLLUc
HzRh9rba63cuvasviXhKkvcBUEuDBJMTnm1IY2yBLaUZJY4g4S3oOTOBEi8ezyNI
ffSwdC9NxbfqpFncq4EFWsKOe8zZWEruAxi86C/2ubruBBO4MBBm/nsSb1na6gs6
sfb5RUMdTbiWHTukNUuaC1yaqUX///MxoJVq31ibNct6LqSmDYNVtySWkS0HcEvD
C8d1BMGtDODO79ifd1GjrBvm3p88YbHyeMZh7nPtaWspUuaLBibmBxYimkzThTo=
=c8Ri
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----