On Don, 24 Jan 2002, Sam Varshavchik wrote:

> That code is correct.  I see nothing wrong with it. 

> Hint: posting a claim that something isn't working correctly, without 
> showing an example, followed by a patch whose meaning is not clear, is not 
> going to fly. 


Hi!

sorry if my first mail was not understandable enough, but here another
try.

insted of using courier as MTA the tool reformime does the same, so i'm
using it instead of passing through SMTP.

# cat mail | reformime-orig -r > mail-reformed
# diff -u 50 mail mail-reformed > diff

not to flam the list, see
http://www.ashberg.de/courier/mail
http://www.ashberg.de/courier/mail-reformed
http://www.ashberg.de/courier/diff

there you can see in line 46 an inserted newline.  The signed part
itself isn't touched, but exactly after that part there is that
newline, and that's the problem.

when using the version which my patch applied that newline can't be
found, and the signature is correct, see
http://www.ashberg.de/courier/mail-reformed-patched
and
http://www.ashberg.de/courier/mail-diff-patched

to verify that signature you can't use 'reformime -e -s 1.1', because
also the MIME-headers of 1.1 are signed, not only the content. You have
to use an PGP/MIME compatible MUA, mutt -f mail[[-reformed]-patched],
then only mail and mail-reformed-patched shows good signature.

I hope that information is enough.

> If there's a problem, it must lie elsewhere.  It'snot here.

not my opinion. Using sendmail there are no problems. And i think this
is not mutt-specific, eudora shows the same, i don't know other
PGP/MIME-MUA's.


Kind Regards

Folke

_______________________________________________
courier-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users

Reply via email to