Daniel Kahn Gillmor dkg at fifthhorseman.net
Tue Oct 10 20:23:23 CEST 2017

On Tue 2017-10-10 19:46:28 +0200, Leo Gaspard wrote:
> 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”)

There's no "must" that a GNU system contain GnuPG.

For example, on Debian ("GNU/Linux"), it's possible in the "testing"
version to have no gnupg package installed at all if you want a
particularly minimal system.  One narrowly-scoped tool from the GnuPG
suite (gpgv) is required if you want secure software updates, but you
can even do away with that if your updates are handled some other way
(or if it is a one-shot system that will never be updated).

That said, on most standard Debian systems, GnuPG is indeed installed by
default, and even on systems where it isn't installed by default, it's
a simple "apt install gnupg" away.

So I think this FAQ is more correct if it's re-written to say
"GNU/Linux" here and in the other place i mentioned.

Amazing how much people want to comment on the color of this particular

Can we get back to improving GnuPG itself?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20171010/12ca961a/attachment.sig>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list