David J. Weller-Fahy wrote:
> * Kevin J. McCarthy <[email protected]> [2015-05-23 16:20 -0400]:
> >Currently I have left the root cert inside the intermediary file.  If
> >this is bad or wrong behaviour, I can change it, it was just easier
> >that way.
> 
> I do not think that is bad behavior.

Okay, I'll leave it as is then.

> Let me know if you still need the PEM, but I believe the second patch
> you sent solves the problem.

No, that's fine.  I think the change makes sense and shouldn't really
cause any problems.

> >Here's a revised patch loosening up the attributes parsing and changing
> >it to only prompt once for a label.
> 
> I just tried the new patch and everything works as it should, thanks!

Great!  I will push it as soon as dev.mutt.org comes back up.  Thanks
for your help.

> Now the only problem is mutt prompting to use the second key every time
> when trying to encrypt.

That will be my next project, at the same time as adding a "purpose"
field to the index.  I'll probably add a "sime_keys update_index"
command to add the missing purpose field for old entries in the index,
and maybe update the trust field (re-checking for expired fields, for
instance).

-Kevin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to