G'day C,
* C Hamel <yogich@xxxxxxxxxx> [041117 13:02]:
> Having googled several times for various answers regarding encryption via
> mutt I am puzzled that the consensus seems to be that inline is outdated
> ...yet KDE uses it in its latest kmail client. Further, though I have
...and most of the world uses Microsoft. Opinions vary as to what is
right. It is just that the other people are wrong. :-)
> successfully encrypted via mutt (1)I cannot read the result except via
> kmail;
Well, that's not good. However without an example no-one is going to
be able to help you.
> (2)no copy encrypted to me is sent to sent-mail unless I am the
> recipient. What gives? How can this be fixed? I don't seem to find any
> help regarding the command structure.
You seem to have some majorly confused set up me thinks.
> I have included the following in my .muttrc file...
> # Inline encryption
> macro compose \CE "Fgpg -ea\ny"
>
> # Clearsign
> macro compose \CP "Fgpg --clearsign\ny"
Huh? Why would you want to do this? Did you RTFM? Look in your mutt
install directories, or the source file for PGP-Notes.txt
It's really as easy as
source ${HOME}/.mutt/gpg.rc
> I have found absolutely nothing for use in .procmailrc in my searches except
> as regards the PGO rather than GnuPG encryption.
Why do you want to put something in .procmailrc?
> Any help/pointers appreciated.
Try and read the PGP-Notes.txt and see if that fixes your problems.
Then if you still have difficulty try and give us some more details to
help you track down the problem.
Good luck,
S.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature