Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3166 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] pgp/gpg signatures & security (was 8.2 Announced)
  • From: Patrick Shanahan <WideGlide@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 06:25:49 -0500
  • Message-id: <20030321112549.GM19253@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
* Tom Emerson <osnut@xxxxxxxxxxx> [03-21-03 06:06]:
[big snip]
> Unfortunately this requires cooperation of people who aren't using kmail to
> tell the developers of kmail where things aren't correct -- not always an
> easy task :(
>
> Tom
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: http://osnut.homelinux.net/TomEmerson.asc
>
> iD8DBQE+evF3V/YHUqq2SwsRAt4aAJ93GIBSZR6jgvCkOfm3ZFR4DepSagCfS0xx
> drQFSvPAzdO2sc/uadiMEO4=
> =rx/S
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --
> Check the headers for your unsubscription address
> For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
> Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
> Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx

[note] siq quoted as seen for example/discussion....

But, your sig is minimal in comparison to the objection. It also does
not show a ..sig-indicator.. here, mutt v1.5.4i which has had gpg/pgp
support built in for many versions.

Appears that kmail has developed its own agenda with respect to gpg/pgp
(and I hate to say it) similar to lookout and lookout express. They
(lookout, etal) cough up gpg/pgp/mime.

You noted in a private post that quoted_printable handling by mutt
could be the problem, but that is not the case.

This discorse *should* *probably* be moved to suse-kde ??
--
Patrick Shanahan Please avoid TOFU and trim >quotes<
http://wahoo.no-ip.org Registered Linux User #207535
icq#173753138 @ http://counter.li.org
Linux, a continuous *learning* experience

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups