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

Re: check-traditional-pgp oddity



* Todd <Freedom_Lover@xxxxxxxxx> [030916 20:11]:
> Stewart V. Wright wrote:
> > * Todd <Freedom_Lover@xxxxxxxxx> [030916 19:31]:
> [...]
> >> 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 just piped the message (well, the plain text part of) to gpg and into
> less.

Ahhh...  You learn something new every day.  I was using 
'gpg --verify' and not seeing any plain text.

>  From that I could see that the text was intact.

Just did it your way and I concur.


> wanted to determine where the text was disappearing.

Good thinking 99.

>  It's mutt that is
> stripping it, though it might be partially because the message has bad form
> (see the other message I just posted here).

Yeah, saw that.  As I said, I don't have the check_traditional patch
applied and I have the same problems so it looks like a mainstream
mutt problem.  David Shaw might have some insight into this...


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