On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:28:22 +0100 Andrej Kacian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:30:14 +0000 > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:37:49 +0100 Ernst Herzberg > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > | Nice messages, all with wrong or not existent signatures. > > > > 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. > > I'll just add that sylpheed-claws has broken gnupg support with > gnupg-1.4.x. Its devs say it only works with 0.3.x, but I only started > to have problems after upgrading to 1.4.x. Most sigs get verified > correctly, some don't. And recently, people have been telling me that > my mails are signed incorrectly. So I stopped signing them for the > time being and am not sure what to do. I've considered a MTA change, > but there is nothing else I'd find convenient enough to use. Guess I'm > just spoiled by SC. :) Don't confuse gpg and gpgme, the statement about -claws only working with 0.3.x is for gpgme. Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.
pgpWJQW7urwKM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
