On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 01:19:42PM +0100, Hannah Schroeter wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 10:23:38PM +0100, steven mestdagh wrote:
> >hello,
> 
> >aanriot@ and I were wondering if anyone is still using ancient pgp
> >2.6.3, and whether it could be removed from the tree?
> >It makes sense to us since this code is very old and unmaintained, and
> >we have newer alternatives, like gnupg and pgp5.
> 
> >thoughts/comments ?
> 
> Do those newer alternatives, especially gnupg, replace *all* the
> functionality of pgp 2.6.3? Especially decrypting documents encrypted
> with pgp 2.6.3? Verifying pgp 2.6.3 signatures?

According to this document, that seems to be possible:
http://www.gnupg.org/gph/en/pgp2x.html

I expect you will need the idea flavor of gnupg.

> For example I haven't got pgpverify for Usenet control messages to run
> with gpg.

Have you tried pgp 5.0? I have no idea about this, that program is not
in the ports tree either. Have you asked its developers?

> Unless it's clear that I can do all this with gnupg (of course with the
> idea plugin/flavor if needed), I'd not be fond of pgp 2.6.3 being
> removed.

You raised some valid questions, thanks. We will decide about this when
we have some more input.

-- 
steven

Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm

Reply via email to