On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 01:47:44PM +0200, Francesco S. wrote: > > > Pete Stephenson <[email protected]> wrote: > >On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Francesco C. > > > > > >Hi Francesco, > > > >Welcome! No need to apologize! We're all pretty friendly here. :) > > > > I'm glad to know that. :-) > > >You can add "--armor" (or "--armour", I had no idea that GnuPG > >supported the British spelling of the word. Interesting!) to > >essentially any command that involves data being output. For > >consistency I will use the spelling without the "u", but both are > >equivalent. > > > > Yep, another thing... My English is scholastic, so not always I will be clear > in my exposition, I also apologize of that. > Anyway you are right, Gnupg recognize only "armor" :-) > > >For example, if you created a key with the KeyID of "KEYID", you could > >export the public key for it to the terminal using "gpg --export > >--armor KEYID". > > > >If you wish to export the public key to a text file which you can then > >include in an email, post on the web, etc., you could use "gpg > >--export --armor KEYID > filename.txt" where 'filename' is whatever > >you wish the file to be called. > > > Perfect, this is what I needed! > > >The armor feature is indeed quite useful, but it comes at a slight > >cost: armored files/messages are slightly larger than their unarmored, > >binary counterparts. > > We are talking of some Kbytes, I think this cost will be absolutely > sosteinable ;-) > > >Cheers! > >-Pete > > Thank you for All > > Francesco
With a new key, wouldn't be that bad. There's a 3k difference between my public key export and public key export with ascii armor. Part of that is because it has 6 subkeys. (4 of which have expired) Wolf
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
