Leo Gaspard leo at gaspard.io
Tue Oct 10 19:46:28 CEST 2017

On 10/10/2017 06:45 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:> (where is the FAQ
maintained, btw?  how is one expected to submit
> patches?)

I based my quotes on https://dev.gnupg.org/source/gnupg-doc.git ,
directory web/faq, running `git grep Linux`.

> I suspect that many minimal Linux-based operating systems (particularly
> one that uses sbase instead of the GNU userland) will *not* feature a
> suitable GnuPG tool.  So the statement above is probably more accurate
> if you change it to GNU/Linux.
> Do you have a list of sbase+Linux distros that we can look at for
> comparison?

Hmm, I was thinking sta.li would have gnupg, but it looks like it
doesn't come embedded. Thanks for noticing!

I would thus like to withdraw this statement, as well as the other one
you pointed out.

That said, I wonder whether the sentence with “all GNU/Linux distros
feature a suitable GnuPG tool” would make sense at all, given GnuPG is,
as pointed out by Mike, part of the GNU operating system, which would,
if I understand correctly, mean that as soon as the distribution
includes GNU it must include GnuPG? (I may easily be wrong in my
interpretation of “part of the GNU operating system”) If I'm correct and
this would be a pleonasm, then maybe replacing it with “most Linux
distros feature a suitable GnuPG tool, with the notable exception of
Android” would make more sense? Then again maybe GNU/Linux would be both
more precise and simpler indeed, despite the pleonasm.

Thanks for the comment!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20171010/8d024721/attachment.sig>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list