Re: Problems building gpgmepy 2.0 against gnupg 2.5.20

Ingo Klöcker <[email protected]> Thu, 21 May 2026 21:56:49 +0200
Newsgroups gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
--===============1135092855918244629==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart7skV125eSSSrCcTVXcK6lg";
 micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"

--nextPart7skV125eSSSrCcTVXcK6lg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; protected-headers="v1"
From: Ingo =?UTF-8?B?S2zDtmNrZXI=?= <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Problems building gpgmepy 2.0 against gnupg 2.5.20
Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 21:56:49 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Donnerstag, 21. Mai 2026 18:37:19 Mitteleurop=C3=A4ische Sommerzeit Andr=
eas=20
Metzler wrote:
> On 2026-05-20 Meik Michalke via Gnupg-devel <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 20. Mai 2026, 07:14:18 CEST schrieb Funda Wang via Gnupg-
devel:
> > > 07:22:46 ValueError: Expected buffer of length 149, got 128
> >=20
> > you need to increase the buffer size, see this patch we use in our debi=
an
> > packages:
> >=20
> > https://github.com/gpgdeb/gpgmepy/blob/gnupg/stable/debian/patches/0030=
=2Din
> > crease-buffer-of-python-test.patch
> Hello Meik,
>=20
> why is this patch tagged with "Forwarded: not-needed"?

I had a brief look at this to figure out why "suddenly" a larger buffer is=
=20
needed. After looking at the packets of the signed data I suspect that the=
=20
culprit is the new manufacturer notation that's added to each signature, e.=
g.
        hashed subpkt 20 len 26 (notation: manu=3D2,2.5+1.12,2,2)

`man gpg` reads
    Note that unless the --compatibility-flags have a "no-manu" flag set, t=
he
    GnuPG and Libgcrypt  major  and  minor  version  (e.g. "2.6+1.11") is
    included in signature packets and keys.

My conclusion is that we should apply the patch to gpgmepy because the test=
=20
will fail with any newer version of gpg.

Regards,
Ingo
--nextPart7skV125eSSSrCcTVXcK6lg
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iJEEABYKADkWIQTbjgIOMowwlCBgvyGxb1mVFkdKugUCag9jgRsUgAAAAAAEAA5t
YW51MiwyLjUrMS4xMiwyLDIACgkQsW9ZlRZHSrrFDgEAs4BC0HcUxCUL0qsdhl6n
YtP0CsOKHhzgl4xDFWKgKLcBAJbV70jweh0uW0VsY/f7lJAIfvSTjJYm59K0ohjP
D1cM
=zZX5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart7skV125eSSSrCcTVXcK6lg--





--===============1135092855918244629==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Gnupg-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel

--===============1135092855918244629==--