Re: mutt claiming that gpg signatures aren't verified [Thomas Stivers <stivers_t@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 08:54:04AM -0500, <20031023135404.GA6388@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] > On some of the lists I am on mutt says that pgp signatures could not be > verified, but the output from gpg looks as if the signature has been > verified. I think this may have something to do with the way some lists > add a mime part with the standard list blurb in it. Attached is an > example from the gnupg-users list. This isn't really problematic, but > the behavior seems unusual. Thanks. My mutt/gpg verifies your attached mail as correct, but your own signature is wrong. I suspect something is wrong with your gpg setup. Have you tried a recent mutt version with unmodified gpg integration? (i.e. the gpg.rc from the mutt source) Christoph -- Christoph Berg <cb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, http://www.df7cb.de/ Wohnheim D, 2405, Universität des Saarlandes, 0681/9657944
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature