-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...and then Jussi Ekholm said... >> This friend I had this email discussion, mentioned that his Mutt >> was compiled on, I quote: 'SUN platform'. > > Heh. I bet you're just drowning in the flood of details! :-)
Heh, indeed! Well, the email discussion with this guy has evidently died, because I haven't received more mails from him. But still, this is quite interesting topic -- how radical difference there is between $pgp_create_traditional and PGP/MIME. > Have you tried sending a really-and-truly just-ASCII message for him to > verify? I haven't played with 1.5 to know one way or the other, but > the way $p_c_t works (or used to) is that it is only good for ASCII, > and if you throw in attachments or other charsets then it will roll > back to MIME. Now admittedly these messages, with your scands > inside, are also in-line signed, but I wonder if that's entirely > healthy. I'm quite sure I sent him pure ASCII mail and I'm also quite sure the "UTF-8 phenomenon" wasn't around. But if I sent him a GnuPG inline-signed mail, the scands were all messed up and the guy complained about them and told me to read Finnish-HOWTO... ;-) - -- Jussi Ekholm -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://erppimaa.ihku.org/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9X7OCAtEARxQQCB4RAvyTAKCuarlM/LB+lPZxHjt9yPRhGW0yXwCgoPOE 9/sFSrMCmoPHm2VIodS87Bk= =6Z+H -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
