G'day Michael,
Apologies as this is all done at the end of the day and my memory is a
bit flakey at the best of times...
* michael@xxxxxxxxxxxx <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [040729 18:01]:
> I set up three procmail recipes, like so:
[SNIP]
I use the following (can you find the reference to where I got it
from???)
## PGP -- This converts from the old style PGP mail, to the MIME
## style that Mutt likes. This recipe is from
## doc/mutt/PGP-Notes.txt
##
:0
* !^Content-Type: message/
* !^Content-Type: multipart/
* !^Content-Type: application/pgp
{
:0 fBw
* ^-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
* ^-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=encrypt"
:0 fBw
* ^-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
* ^-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
* ^-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=sign"
}
> Suggestions as for how to get Mutt to handle inline PGP messages in
> the same way as PGP/MIME ones, or ideas about where to start looking,
> would be much appreciated.
There is a auto_check_pgp_traditional (or some combination like that)
patch or it might even be mainstream by now.
Of course there is the check-traditional-pgp option which is in the
manual.
> If it makes any difference, I am running Mutt 1.5.6, grabbed from CVS
> just a couple of days ago.
It make a difference 'cos you're using mutt which is a GOOD THING!
:-)
Cheers,
S.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature