> The workaround to this problem with inline signatures is to make the > message and the signature separate MIME parts and specify that their > contents are opaque. But then it is up to the mail client to recognize > the "Content-type: multipart/signed" and the "Content-disposition: > inline" MIME headers so it gets displayed as something other than a > couple of attachments, yet still can be verified as a signed message. > And that's where somebody gets to write and submit a patch for > Evolution.
How is that a patch for Evolution .. to make the OTHER client see the message as something more than 2 sttachments (which is how Outlook Express sees GPG signed stuff)? Wouldn't the Evo patch make Evo NOT send as "Content-type: multipart/signed" and the "Content-disposition: inline" MIME headers? Which would then not render it opaque? I'm confused. _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
