Re: pgp signatures?
On Saturday, September 25, 2004 at 9:18:46 PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 2004-09-25 19:42:41 +0200, Alain Bench wrote:
>> GOOD. Originally had dots. But no QP, therefore no possible harmfull
>> deQPification.
Same for test 2.
> ups, so let's take a look at this one. ;-)
> =2E
Aaah! This one is both GOOD and QP. That's unexpected behaviour.
Hum... What about _3_ dots?
Alain threedots Bench.
--
Software should be written to deal with every conceivable error
RFC 1122 / Robustness Principle