Re: check-traditional-pgp oddity
On Wednesday, September 17, 2003 at 2:59:49 PM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> It's probably not caused by the user agent at all. More likely it's
> some brain-dead MTA, an equally brain-dead sysadmin adding the
> (hopelessly brain-dead) lawyers' disclaimers, or, as you said, some
> other evil footer adding software.
My low guesses at the time were, AFAICS:
- Sender's MUA or signing agent most probable.
- No disclaimer involved.
- MTA possible.
- List footer nearly excluded (unless by effect of an interaction).
...but as I said I could not explore the case much. Especially I
didn't found there mails by others with same MUA and inline PGP or
flowed text.
> As far as filing it as a mutt bug, that's a hard call. I suppose mutt
> could be more graceful here and not chomp up the first paragraph, but
> it is an out of spec message. There's only so many broken cases you
> can check for. :)
Sure, but I always feel very unhappy when my favorite mailer fails,
even when that's 100% not it's fault. Something as betrayal. ;-)
> I'll attach the diff of pgp.c that I came up with to do this.
Thanks! I test version 1 from previous mail since yesterday on 1.4:
Showed me every 1st paragraph in problem mails, and doesn't seem so far
to have adverse effect. Of course it doesn't change sig verification
status.
You might want to make it present itself in "mutt -v":
--- PATCHES Tue Nov 6 19:59:33 2001
+++ PATCHES Tue Nov 6 19:59:42 2001
@@ -1,0 +1 @@
+patch-1.5.4-tmz.inline_pgp_buggy_separator.2
Thank you, bye! Alain.
--
When you want to reply to a mailing list, please avoid doing so from a
digest. This often builds incorrect references and break threads.