On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 20:40 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:25:32 -0500 Aron Griffis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Tue Jan 18 2005, 03:30:14AM EST] > | > Kmail and Evo are currently b0rked with respect to certain > | > signatures. There's a reasonable chance that the sig on this message > | > will look duff to anyone using one of those broken clients, even > | > though it's valid. > | > | Dan Armak wrote: [Tue Jan 18 2005, 06:07:46AM EST] > | > Yeah, even with kmail from kde 3.4.0beta1 :-( > | > | I'm not convinced Ciaran's statement is correct. The message shows up > | invalid in mutt as well. Dan's signature, produced with kmail, worked > | fine. > > Mmmm, ok, how about this one? It's possible that -claws is *also* > broken, and that 1.0 just fixed it, in which case they need to write > better changelogs :)
Interesting. Earlier, when ciaranm said that his were "valid and your client must be broken", I was showing his as invalid. Now, I am showing his as valid, and I didn't change my client. It must have been -claws. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Operational/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
