Hi Werner, Werner Koch <[email protected]> skribis:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 23:52, Ludovic Courtès said: > >> For some reason (perhaps a bug in a previous version of GnuPG I used >> long ago?), my public key ring had come to contain my own public key >> twice, with the same fingerprint and all. > > Should not happen because we use on Unix a copy-to-temp/update/rename > strategy. There are bugs of course and so there is no guarantee that it > does not happen. I’ve been carrying this keyring for years, so it could be that there was once a bug that led to this inconsistency. > Eventually this will go away because 2.3 will come with the optional > keyboxd daemon which uses sqlite and keeps a unique index on the > primary key's fingerprint. It will also makes things faster and more > robust related to changes when running several gpg processes. > Drawback is that we have yet another format to store keys. Nice. >> To recover from it, I deleted my public key with ‘--delete-key’ twice, >> ‘--delete-secret-key’ once for the corresponding secret key, and then >> re-imported both the public key and the secret key, which I had >> previously exported. Now everything is back to normal. > > That is sound fix. I am not aware of other reports but ppl might not > have considered this a bug. > > kbxutil --find-dups pubring.kbx > > should print a list of duplicate records. Take care: kbxutil is more of > a debugging aid than a real tool. Interesting! Good news: I don’t have other duplicate keys. > While you spoke about easypg: I often have problems with it and it would > be nice if we could find a maintainer for it. With the Emacs' new FFI a > move to GPGME might also be an idea. Yeah. EPG seems to be actively maintained though; this recent change I mentioned is what led me to discover this issue. Thanks for your feedback! Ludo’. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
