Mailing List Archive
tlug.jp Mailing List tlug archive tlug Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 00:38:54 -0500
- From: Scott Robbins <scottro@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- References: <20020903012221.GD28108@example.com> <20020903040011.GC1996@example.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.4i
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 01:00:11PM +0900, Jonathan Byrne wrote: > On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:22:21PM -0500, Scott Robbins wrote: > > >Not sure if anyone is interested, but I did a bit more experimenting for > >my own curiosity. The patch to enable an OE client to read a mutt gpg > >signed email without it being considered an attachment is here: > > OK, question: If, as Josh notes, this is not an "issue" but just Mutt > being compliant with RFC 3156 and the problem is OE's for not being > so, is the end result of this patch then to make Mutt stop being > compliant with RFC 3156? I didn't check the README that closely--I was trying to figure out, where the heck do I apply this patch (it's not that trivial in Gentoo--actually, how would you apply it to an RPM?--that'd be worse Gentoo wasn't difficult so much as a little tedious. Of course, I was a lot cockier about it after Josh confirmed in private email that I was on the right track :) ). > > Also, the README for the patch states that there has been > some speculation about 7-bit/8-bit issues. Has anyone > encountered any borkage there? Just put in the patch tonight, so don't know yet. > > It also notes that as of Mutt 1.5 the functionality of the > patch will be included in Mutt, rendering the patch obsolete. Now, here's what I find interesting. In a private email, someone pointed out to me that it isn't just mutt--he runs into the same issues with Sylpheed, Evolution and a few others. Also, testing what I have in the house, I found the same problem with Eudora on WinXP and Mac OSX's Mail program. Which indicates that none of them seem to care too much about standards. > > Since the problem is really OE's, I ain't patching :-) And, sad to say, not just OE--see above. 1.5 is in beta, so it shouldn't be an issue for mutt users too much longer. Actually, I can only see it being an issue in certain fairly convoluted circumstances--one can always tell friends or family deal with it. :) Hrrm, somehow the random Buffy the Vampire Slayer quote below seems apropos for we mutt users. :) - -- Scott PGP keyID EB3467D6 (1B48 077d 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 D575 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6 Xander: Just because you're better than us doesn't mean you can be all superior. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9dEru+lTVdes0Z9YRAni2AJ9LKP2saano6NtKVzOFYJFHRpqrzACgsFSO /KUVnBCE4FXuN3AcwfItcps= =Mjd/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- From: simon colston
- References:
- [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- From: Scott Robbins
- Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- From: Jonathan Byrne
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- Next by Date: Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- Previous by thread: Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- Next by thread: Re: [tlug] Followup on mutt and gpg
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links