Werner Koch: > On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 18:39, patrick-mailingli...@whonix.org said: > >> when using --verify combined with --status-fd [or --status-file], how >> can one notice in scripts, that processing the one signature is done and >> that further status-fd messages belong to the next message? > > That is unfortunately a bit complicated due to different behaviour in > gpgsm and gpg. I suggest to do what we do in gpgme/src/verify.c . Of > course if would be useful to make sure that NEWSIG is also emitted by > gpg but you also need to take care of older gpg versions. > > I assume adding NEWSIG to gpg has simply be forgotten.
Well, I don't speak C, so I can't make head or tail of "what we do in gpgme/src/verify.c". Maybe let's put it this way. If there is no guarantee to get a NEWSIG or other separator... Is there a limited combination of start and end keywords? What I mean... Here is an example... start: [GNUPG:] ERRSIG [...] end__: [GNUPG:] NODATA [...] start: [GNUPG:] SIG_ID [...] end__: [GNUPG:] TRUST_[...] start: [GNUPG:] ERRSIG [...] end__: [GNUPG:] NO_PUBKEY [...] Is there a complete list of all possible start/end keyword combinations? Cheers, Patrick _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users