>
> > May I get some feedback for this patch?
>
> I don't like the idea of introducing the dependency of "aspell".
>
> Better make generating passphrases a utility of its own. Passphrases are
> a topic of its own. Think of the many different languages one would want.
>
+1
While I feel
On 10/05/2016 16:43, Martin Bless wrote:
Am Tue, 10 May 2016 15:51:24 +0200 schrieb Joschka Tillmanns:
Hello Joschka,
>May I get some feedback for this patch?
I don't like the idea of introducing the dependency of "aspell". For
example I'd like to use "pass" in combination with "Ansible"
Am Tue, 10 May 2016 15:51:24 +0200 schrieb Joschka Tillmanns:
Hello Joschka,
> May I get some feedback for this patch?
I don't like the idea of introducing the dependency of "aspell". For
example I'd like to use "pass" in combination with "Ansible" to set up a
server. But I don't want to
PASSPHRASE generates a series of words which are seperated by a single
whitespace character and stores them in pass-name. The behavior of this
function is therefor similar to GENERATE. --clip,-c as well as
--force,-c behave the same. --words,-w lets the user define how many
words the passphrase
PASSPHRASE generates a series of words which are seperated by a single
whitespace character and stores them in pass-name. The behavior of this
function is therefor similar to GENERATE. --clip,-c as well as
--force,-c behave the same. --words,-w lets the user define how many
words the passphrase
