[Save email description file if a send fails
Applied.
[Add --logfile and --delete-logfile options to send command.
[Rename --logfile and --delete-logfile commands to --file and --delete-file
[Update tests to use --logfile instead of --file
[Move get_fileopt to DarcsArguments.lhs and rename
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 02:53:09PM +0100, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
gpg: CRC error; 66E358 - DC366E
gpg: quoted printable character in armor - probably a buggy MTA has been
used
Note that this also happens when no MTA is involved. This is issue 56.
Where is this error from? darcs
gpg: CRC error; 66E358 - DC366E
gpg: quoted printable character in armor - probably a buggy MTA has been
used
Note that this also happens when no MTA is involved. This is issue 56.
Where is this error from? darcs apply?
- from Gnus;
- from gpg if you pass it the whole mail
On Jan 16, 2006, at 08:20:11, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
So the tradeoff is:
- illegally use Old PGP within an attachment, as we do, which makes
the signature verifiable outside of the mailer, but not within it;
- obey the rules and use PGP/MIME, which will make it impossible to
- illegally use Old PGP within an attachment, as we do, which makes
the signature verifiable outside of the mailer, but not within it;
- obey the rules and use PGP/MIME, which will make it impossible to
verify the signature after the attachment is saved to disk.
Does anyone
Note that this also happens when no MTA is involved. This is issue 56.
Would anyone familiar with the new MIME encoder be willing to have a
look at RFC 3156?
I'm suddenly realising we are in trouble, and that it's better to
leave things in the current state than implement PGP/MIME.
There
Sat Jan 14 17:06:52 EST 2006 Zachary P. Landau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Update tests to use --logfile instead of --file
Without commenting on the change of option names, I think
this patch name says the reverse of what's intended.
Indeed it does. I was having a dyslexic day. I can resubmit
Does anyone see a good way out? For now, I'm closing the report as
unfixable.
How about we generate and send both kinds of signatures?
I'm not very keen on that, unless someone is willing to spend time
investigating how mailers react to such things.
Sorry, I forgot that there were new patches in darcs-unstable. My
previous patch fails with a conflict. Attached is a newer version
that should work with the current repository.
--
Zachary P. Landau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
save-email-description-file-if-a-send-fails.dpatch
Description: Binary data
Hello,
I decided to go ahead and implement the --logfile and --delete-logfile
support for send, as mentioned in my previous email. The first patch
is just a resend of the one in that same previous email.
Because these patches use a file for an email and not for a long
description, I also am
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 05:12:40PM -0500, Zachary P. Landau wrote:
Sat Jan 14 17:06:52 EST 2006 Zachary P. Landau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Update tests to use --logfile instead of --file
Without commenting on the change of option names, I think
this patch name says the reverse of what's intended.
Hi,
I realized while working on another patch that get_fileopt should
really be in DarcsArguments.lhs and be named get_file, to be
consistent with other options (like subject/get_subject) for example.
Attached at the same patches but with an extra one to move this
function. Sorry for not
12 matches
Mail list logo
