<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: check-traditional-pgp oddity



G'day Todd,

* Todd <Freedom_Lover@xxxxxxxxx> [030916 19:31]:

> >   Have you tried piping the message to gpg w/o using mutt?
> 
> I hadn't done that, but in trying it just now, it behaves as expected, the
> text is all there.

Are you sure and how did you check?  I'm on the GnuPG mailing list
also, and the message does not verify properly.  I avoided accessing
the message through mutt and just copied it out of my maildir.  The
signature verification fails (gpg --verify), but how did you decide
that GPG parsed the message properly?

 
> I had run mutt with -n -F /dev/null before which gave me an "Error: unable
> to create PGP subprocess!" message before the normal "BEGIN PGP SIGNED
> MESSAGE" output.

Ditto on the error message, and I don't have the traditional_pgp patch
installed.


I've got no idea about what is going on though...


Cheers,

S.
-- 
European Citizens: Please do a little work to convince the European
Parliament to reject software patents. This page explains the issue
and provides suggestions for action; take the time to participate.
  http://swpat.ffii.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature