Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 02:01:11PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, someone wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm using 7.0, and hating it. I should never have upgraded.
> >
> > I am beginning to wonder whether we should have gone that route on the
> > swerver .. bu still.. too late now.
>
> What I'm really hating is the stuff that broke when I upgraded from 6.2.
> Mainly X font stuff, and I rally can't be bothered to dig through the
> gazillion different places that X puts stuff so I can fix it.
Hmm. Both my laptop and desktop are running 6.2 atm. I find that
whenever I do a helix-gnome update (or whatever they're calling it this
week) it breaks the fonts. The server works fine, it's just that the
/etc/rc.d/init.d/xfs file is knackered. Typing xfs & from the command
line still works fine for me, so I'd check that first as it's probably the
same b0rken RPM they both install.
I'm running 6.2 with the following key additions: helix-gnome, perl 5.6,
new apache (with mod_perl), sudo, and the 2.4.2 kernel. I recently
installed my laptop from scratch and this took me about a day to install
(+ a day fscking around with partition magic and windows.) It Works For
Me(tm) but I'm sure there's a better way.
Later.
Mark.
--
print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_>6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} (
Name => 'Mark Fowler',Title => 'Technology Developer' ,
Firm => 'Profero Ltd',Web => 'http://www.profero.com/' ,
Email => '[EMAIL PROTECTED]', Phone => '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960' )
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 01:58:14AM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: >the keyfile was an ascii armoured v6.5.8 keyfile, 1024 bit RSA that I >got with pgp -kxa .. GPG said 'unrecognised key format' since one of the >things I need is for users to be able to export their public keys from >PGP then being able to use PGP keys is a must have. AFAIR there may be some formats supported in one but not the other; I thought this had been solved, though. Check out www.gnupg.org for more info on the latest on this. Roger
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, you wrote: > On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 02:01:11PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: > > >I haven't considered the GPG option yet .. its going to be for a user > >thing .. and PGP is more common .. I am right in thinking that GPG and > >PGP are basically different and not interchangeable aren't I ? > > No. > > >Itried > >importing PGP keyfile into GOG and it didn;t like it. s/O/P/ > > Was it a PGP v2.x keyfile? v5.x and v6.x should (for the most part) work > reasonably well. That is rather the point of GPG. well thats super :) .. in that case I'l deffo have a go at GPG as now that Big Phil has left NAI and they won;t release source for v7.0 they can get stuffed. And since PGP::Sign supports GPG the thats all sooper then innit. the keyfile was an ascii armoured v6.5.8 keyfile, 1024 bit RSA that I got with pgp -kxa .. GPG said 'unrecognised key format' since one of the things I need is for users to be able to export their public keys from PGP then being able to use PGP keys is a must have. > >If all else fails I'll jsut use GPG .. which will be a pain as Kmail (my > >mailer) works nicely with PGP .. but not GPG as yet .. hmmmph > > Search for pgpgpg; it's a wrapper to solve this problem. kewl // I'll give it a go. .. although since GPG and PGP are interoperable I can continue with PGP on my machine and GPG on the server so thats all fine. thanks muchly .. I'd obviously go the worng end of the stick with GPG, I had assumed, incorrectly, it wouldnt work with PGP encrypted messages, and was an alternative, but different thing altogether. but hey, there you go. -- Robin Szemeti The box said "requires windows 95 or better" So I installed Linux!
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
An entity claiming to be David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: : : What I'm really hating is the stuff that broke when I upgraded from 6.2. : Mainly X font stuff, and I rally can't be bothered to dig through the : gazillion different places that X puts stuff so I can fix it. I'm still : toying with the idea of switching to Debian. I run Debian on a couple of : my boxes, but I'm not as comfortable with it as I am with Deadrat, and : I know that it'll be a lot of work to switch the machine from one : distro to another without losing anything important. : I have recently gone from RH to Debian, and I'm wondering why I didn't sooner. RedHat has a glittery Solaris-esque install, but vanilla installs need too much work (another similarity with Solaris who made half of /usr/bin friggin' setuid root). RedHat also irritated me greatly with the changes in RPM and their neglect of the SPARC disributions, so I decided to play with Debian (which has a philosophy closer to mine). I can tell you already that dselect is a wonderful utility, and dpkg appears to be better than rpm (at least for my purposes). If you do move, keep in mind that unstable means unstable. Mark ... and Debian even does the SysV boot sequence, now. -- [] | "Girls in occupied countries always [] Mark Rogaski | get into trouble with soldiers," she [] [EMAIL PROTECTED] | said, when I asked her what the Virgin [] | birth was. -- Florence King, CoaFSL PGP signature
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 02:01:11PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: >I haven't considered the GPG option yet .. its going to be for a user >thing .. and PGP is more common .. I am right in thinking that GPG and >PGP are basically different and not interchangeable aren't I ? No. >Itried >importing PGP keyfile into GOG and it didn;t like it. Was it a PGP v2.x keyfile? v5.x and v6.x should (for the most part) work reasonably well. That is rather the point of GPG. >If all else fails I'll jsut use GPG .. which will be a pain as Kmail (my >mailer) works nicely with PGP .. but not GPG as yet .. hmmmph Search for pgpgpg; it's a wrapper to solve this problem. Roger
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 02:01:11PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: > On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > > > I'm using 7.0, and hating it. I should never have upgraded. > > I am beginning to wonder whether we should have gone that route on the > swerver .. bu still.. too late now. What I'm really hating is the stuff that broke when I upgraded from 6.2. Mainly X font stuff, and I rally can't be bothered to dig through the gazillion different places that X puts stuff so I can fix it. I'm still toying with the idea of switching to Debian. I run Debian on a couple of my boxes, but I'm not as comfortable with it as I am with Deadrat, and I know that it'll be a lot of work to switch the machine from one distro to another without losing anything important. > > I found some gpg binaries on fr.rpmfind.net which work just fine for > > everything I've had to do so far. > > I haven't considered the GPG option yet .. its going to be for a user > thing .. and PGP is more common .. I am right in thinking that GPG and > PGP are basically different and not interchangeable aren't I ? .. Itried > importing PGP keyfile into GOG and it didn;t like it. They are interoperable but not compatible, if you see what I mean. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/ This is a signature. There are many like it but this one is mine. ** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important ** PGP signature
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, you wrote: > Robin Szemeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > OK .. I'm getting desperate now :) > > > > Anyone out there running Redhat 7.0? > > > > managed to build PGP from source on it? ... or if not found a binary of > > PGP that works with PGP::Sign ?? . .poxy things giving me grief .. > > of course it builds fine on 6.2. > > which version of PGP? well any would be nice ;) 6.5.8i would be my choice if I could get it to work -- Robin Szemeti The box said "requires windows 95 or better" So I installed Linux!
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 12:25:28PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: > > OK .. I'm getting desperate now :) > > > > Anyone out there running Redhat 7.0? > > > > managed to build PGP from source on it? ... or if not found a binary of > > PGP that works with PGP::Sign ?? . .poxy things giving me grief .. > > of course it builds fine on 6.2. > > I'm using 7.0, and hating it. I should never have upgraded. I am beginning to wonder whether we should have gone that route on the swerver .. bu still.. too late now. > I found some gpg binaries on fr.rpmfind.net which work just fine for > everything I've had to do so far. I haven't considered the GPG option yet .. its going to be for a user thing .. and PGP is more common .. I am right in thinking that GPG and PGP are basically different and not interchangeable aren't I ? .. Itried importing PGP keyfile into GOG and it didn;t like it. binaries of PGP appear to work for most things .. but when I try to use PGP::Sign it bombs. The problem is that PGP::Sign use open(3) to start PGP in batch mode and pass it file handles. But it wont work under dedrat 7 .. trying to build PGP from sources under dedrat 7.0 reveals errors in the compile relating to the filehandles, specifically the file offset pointers. infact: PGPFileOffset is a long int, but it tries to assign it to a struct that is something else .. the result is not pretty. If all else fails I'll jsut use GPG .. which will be a pain as Kmail (my mailer) works nicely with PGP .. but not GPG as yet .. hmmmph -- Robin Szemeti The box said "requires windows 95 or better" So I installed Linux!
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
Robin Szemeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OK .. I'm getting desperate now :) > > Anyone out there running Redhat 7.0? > > managed to build PGP from source on it? ... or if not found a binary of > PGP that works with PGP::Sign ?? . .poxy things giving me grief .. > of course it builds fine on 6.2. which version of PGP? -- 1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED] liberty is always dangerous, but it is the safest thing we have. -- harry emerson fosdick
Re: Dedrat 7.0 and PGP
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 12:25:28PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: > OK .. I'm getting desperate now :) > > Anyone out there running Redhat 7.0? > > managed to build PGP from source on it? ... or if not found a binary of > PGP that works with PGP::Sign ?? . .poxy things giving me grief .. > of course it builds fine on 6.2. I'm using 7.0, and hating it. I should never have upgraded. I found some gpg binaries on fr.rpmfind.net which work just fine for everything I've had to do so far. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/ This is a signature. There are many like it but this one is mine. ** I read encrypted mail first, so encrypt if your message is important ** PGP signature
