Mailing List Archive by Gossamer Threads http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/ en-us (c) Gossamer Threads Inc. All rights reserved. 25 Nov 2009 08:32:21 -0800 120 75 23 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/ http://www.gossamer-threads.com/images/lists/rss_logo.jpg On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 08:59:00PM +0100, Werner Koch wrote: > On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:12, ikrabbe.ask@gmail.com said: > > > svn paths on a central pla 23 Nov 2009 13:51:44 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49480 On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:12, ikrabbe.ask@gmail.com said: > Actually there are strong reasons to use git, not just that it might be > "en-vouge" and its 23 Nov 2009 11:59:00 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49479 On 11/23/2009 09:15 AM, Werner Koch wrote: > We settled for CVS/SVN a long time ago and won't change every few years > for the then en-vogue VCS. Fur 23 Nov 2009 08:45:49 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49478 On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 03:15:33PM +0100, Werner Koch wrote: > On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:10, ikrabbe.ask@gmail.com said: > > > when I try to compile gnu 23 Nov 2009 08:12:35 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49477 On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:10, ikrabbe.ask@gmail.com said: > when I try to compile gnupg and gpgme from trunk I need a libassuan with a new > API version 23 Nov 2009 06:15:33 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49476 On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:38, philcerf@googlemail.com said: > But could it EVER happen, that gpg still printed something to stdout? Sure, if gpg detect 23 Nov 2009 02:59:20 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49467 Hi, when I try to compile gnupg and gpgme from trunk I need a libassuan with a new API version, that should be available from version 1.1.0 on. But 23 Nov 2009 01:10:15 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49466 On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 03:47:34PM +0100, Philippe Cerfon wrote: > So far so good. I would however like to let is use > ~/.gnupg/pub|secring.gpg but o 21 Nov 2009 08:14:22 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49454 Hi. I'd like to use gpg in some scripts for decryption only. The encrypted files are mainly symmetrically encrypted (I mean the session key), but it 21 Nov 2009 06:47:34 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49451 Hi. Minor question: Say I use gpg in batch mode to decrypt a file to stdout. Of course this might fail (the passphrase might be wrong, or the message 21 Nov 2009 06:38:54 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49452 On Nov 19, 2009, at 2:57 AM, Werner Koch wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:02, dshaw@jabberwocky.com said: > >> V5 is nowhere near 6 months away. I'd 19 Nov 2009 06:17:06 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49441 On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:02, dshaw@jabberwocky.com said: > V5 is nowhere near 6 months away. I'd be shocked if it happened before 2011. There just is 18 Nov 2009 23:57:02 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49440 On 11/18/2009 01:50 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote: > If V5 is going to be more than six months or so, though, then I think > enabling DSA2 by default sho 18 Nov 2009 11:08:33 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49433 On Nov 18, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Werner Koch wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:47, dshaw@jabberwocky.com said: > >> Proposal: I think it's time to make - 18 Nov 2009 11:07:02 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49435 On Nov 18, 2009, at 1:50 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote: > David Shaw wrote: >> Thoughts? > > Depending on how soon the V5 key spec is ready, we may wan 18 Nov 2009 11:02:08 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49434 David Shaw wrote: > Thoughts? Depending on how soon the V5 key spec is ready, we may want to fold everything in all at once. Changing defaults isn't 18 Nov 2009 10:50:30 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49432 On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:47, dshaw@jabberwocky.com said: > Proposal: I think it's time to make --enable-dsa2 the default. It's been supported for 3 ye 18 Nov 2009 08:28:55 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49430 The default for DSA2 in GPG is currently "off" - that is, by default, we fix the size of a DSA key at 1024 bits, and the q size (to specify the hash) 18 Nov 2009 06:47:47 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49428 Bernhard Reiter wrote: > Am Freitag, 13. November 2009 05:12:30 schrieb David Shaw: >> Some keyservers run hkp over port 80 to deal with firewalls (so 13 Nov 2009 08:06:50 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49371 --- dirmngr.texi-r321 2009-11-13 15:41:14.541212500 +0100 +++ dirmngr.texi.new 2009-11-13 15:42:24.009554000 +0100 @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ @opindex 13 Nov 2009 06:43:08 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49370 Am Freitag, 13. November 2009 05:12:30 schrieb David Shaw: > Some keyservers run hkp over port 80 to deal with firewalls (so it's   > hkp://keyserver. 13 Nov 2009 00:40:14 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49368 On Nov 12, 2009, at 3:19 PM, Bernhard Reiter wrote: >> There isn't really a *http* keyserver (in the sense of >> being a database of many keys that c 12 Nov 2009 20:12:30 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49366 David, On Thursday 12 November 2009, David Shaw wrote: > On Nov 12, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > > I might miss something here, but fo 12 Nov 2009 12:19:41 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49365 On Nov 12, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > I might miss something here, but for me on gnupg 2.0.13 (and 2.0.11) > retrieving keys via the 12 Nov 2009 10:17:00 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49363 I might miss something here, but for me on gnupg 2.0.13 (and 2.0.11) retrieving keys via the "http://" scheme seems to be broken. (Also it seem that 12 Nov 2009 09:24:08 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49362 Hi, I don't know if the original key was from a Mac. I got no issues when I imported the original key to PGP Desktop (v9.8). The original key can be 11 Nov 2009 19:03:54 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49357 Viet H. Phan wrote: > Hi, > > My partner sent me an ASCII-armored PGP public key (the attached file) > that had been generated using GnuPG v2.0.12. T 11 Nov 2009 11:38:17 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49355 Hi, My partner sent me an ASCII-armored PGP public key (the attached file) that had been generated using GnuPG v2.0.12. Then I failed to import that 11 Nov 2009 09:20:19 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49354 On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 15:46, klaus@flittner.org said: > Attached you find a patch which addresses the decrypt issue. > It changes the setdata command o 09 Nov 2009 08:53:51 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49344 Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> said: > On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:55, klaus@flittner.org said: > > 2. Change the protocol used for genkey and decrypt > > 08 Nov 2009 06:46:52 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49315 Oh, excuse me, with the arguments it gives me the prompt as it should. But whats then the problem? I will reseach it and give you more information wh 29 Oct 2009 10:48:25 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49237 On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:28, Thomas-Bahn@gmx.net said: > gpg-connect-agent > > GET_PASSPHRASE > ERR 67109144 IPC Parameterfehler <GPG Agent> - 29 Oct 2009 05:28:15 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49230 Hello, i have the problem, that gpg-agent throws errors when launching the pinentry. I analyzed the problem and would give you my results in the hope 27 Oct 2009 13:28:45 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49220 On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 18:49, klaus@flittner.org said: > in scd/command.c the buffer allocated by cmd_setdata is never freed. > The attached patch frees 25 Oct 2009 08:11:29 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49210 Hi, in scd/command.c the buffer allocated by cmd_setdata is never freed. The attached patch frees the buffer after use and before a second use of set 24 Oct 2009 09:49:34 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49206 Todd Zullinger wrote: > Is it possible to set the digest-algo used via gpgme when creating > some clearsigned text? The goal would be to generate a s 22 Oct 2009 15:58:24 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49203 Is it possible to set the digest-algo used via gpgme when creating some clearsigned text? The goal would be to generate a signature and ensure that, 22 Oct 2009 12:48:13 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49202 Eric Dorland wrote: > * Werner Koch (wk@gnupg.org) wrote: >> On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 00:59, eric@debian.org said: >> >>> was still not stabilized. It's no 20 Oct 2009 07:29:43 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49187 On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:55, klaus@flittner.org said: > i have a openpgp card that supports 4096 keys (even the one from > kernelconcepts seems to supp 20 Oct 2009 00:36:25 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49186 Hi, i have a openpgp card that supports 4096 keys (even the one from kernelconcepts seems to support them). But the usage with gpg is restricted to 3 19 Oct 2009 10:55:13 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49184 On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:51, mat69@gmx.net said: > So I have to assume that 0 tells me that it is mathematical correct, as it > would be e.g. 4 otherw 16 Oct 2009 09:32:55 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49175 On Friday 16 October 2009 14:26:38 Werner Koch wrote: > On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:22, mat69@gmx.net said: > >> This sets another bit and thus the VALID f 16 Oct 2009 06:51:29 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49174 On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:22, mat69@gmx.net said: >> This sets another bit and thus the VALID flag is not anymore correct. > This would imo apply to the 16 Oct 2009 05:26:38 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49173 On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:12, mat69@gmx.net said: > It should probably be something like: > > /* Calculate the red/green flag. */ > if (sig->validi 16 Oct 2009 03:31:01 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49170 On Friday 16 October 2009 12:31:01 Werner Koch wrote: > If you set the VALID flag here you would need to reset it later if any > other special conditi 16 Oct 2009 02:22:36 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49172 On Oct 15, 2009, at 6:55 PM, John Clizbe wrote: > [cc to sks-devel as this may be a SKS issue] > > Matthias Fuchs wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Not sure if tha 15 Oct 2009 16:40:10 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49164 [cc to sks-devel as this may be a SKS issue] Matthias Fuchs wrote: > Hi, > > Not sure if that is the correct ml, if not sorry in advance. > > I don 15 Oct 2009 15:55:04 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49163 Hi, Not sure if that is the correct ml, if not sorry in advance. I don't want to use hkp, but rather http e.g. http://stinkfoot.org:11371/pks/looku 15 Oct 2009 13:16:29 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49162 On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:32, mat69@gmx.net said: > I do a verification of a file and what baffles me is the summary of the > signature. If I use a wro 15 Oct 2009 12:37:28 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49160 On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:07, tux.tsndcb@free.fr said: > I've see than you work on EncFS support with g13, do you think your can also add LUKS support ? 15 Oct 2009 11:11:43 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49158 On Thursday 15 October 2009 21:37:28 Werner Koch wrote: > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:32, mat69@gmx.net said: > > I do a verification of a file and what ba 15 Oct 2009 10:47:46 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49161 Btw. my changes still do not handle all gpgme_validity_t, but imo they should all be handled. _______________________________________________ Gnupg- 15 Oct 2009 10:07:06 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49159 On Thursday 15 October 2009 17:32:20 Matthias Fuchs wrote: > Hi, > > I do a verification of a file and what baffles me is the summary of the > signat 15 Oct 2009 09:12:43 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49157 Hi, I do a verification of a file and what baffles me is the summary of the signature. If I use a wrong file it correctly outputs GPGME_SIGSUM_RED, 15 Oct 2009 08:32:20 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49156 Hello Werner, I've see than you work on EncFS support with g13, do you think your can also add LUKS support ? Thanks in advanced for your answer. B 15 Oct 2009 08:07:27 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49154 Hi, I wanted to used the reader's pinpad of my reader (covadis vega-alpha), so I need to use your internal ccid-driver. Modification has been done on 15 Oct 2009 02:51:06 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49153 Hi! As some of you might have noticed, I am currently working on a new GnuPG tool to manage a crypto container with OpenPGP or X.509 keys. This tool 14 Oct 2009 06:18:01 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49145 On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:15, beebe@math.utah.edu said: > The gnupg code seems to violate that highlighted requirement, since it > has subsequent statem 13 Oct 2009 01:00:53 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49134 I've made some further progress in getting gnupg-2.0.13 installed on various local Unix platforms, and today, hit an apparent gcc-ism in the source co 12 Oct 2009 14:15:26 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49133 On Saturday 10 October 2009 20:36:24 Daniel Mueller wrote: > Hi Matthias, > > On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:19:14 +0200 Matthias Fuchs wrote: > > I have GPG 11 Oct 2009 05:45:26 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49119 Hi Matthias, On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:19:14 +0200 Matthias Fuchs wrote: > I have GPGME 1.2.0 [..] > [..] > gpgme_ctx_t ctx = 0; > gpgme_error_t errCtx 10 Oct 2009 11:36:24 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49118 Hi, I hope this is the correct place to describe my problem. I have GPGME 1.2.0, GnuPG 1.4.10 and GnuPG 2.0.13 installed on my 64 bit Arch- Linux sy 10 Oct 2009 06:19:14 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49115 Hauke Laging wrote: >> LDAP servers make a great keyserver for this sort of application > > Not being reachable is not the application I was talking 05 Oct 2009 15:45:33 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49105 you can use http://retroshare.sf.net as it is a web of trust, you can add friends without a key server, but only, if friends of friends know them. but 05 Oct 2009 14:49:40 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49103 Hauke Laging wrote: > Maybe. But I would not call it science that you imply that harvesting > from key servers will result in about the same amount of 05 Oct 2009 14:33:38 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49102 Am Montag 05 Oktober 2009 schrieb John Clizbe: > They are also not so good at estimating the incidence of "Keyserver > SPAM". Yes, it happens. But wh 05 Oct 2009 14:16:54 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49100 Am Montag 05 Oktober 2009 schrieb Robert J. Hansen: > Sure, but this just goes to show you that people are awful at estimating > risks. Maybe. But I 05 Oct 2009 14:02:39 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49099 Robert J. Hansen wrote: > Hauke Laging wrote: >> My aim is to let people publish their keys without being afraid that *this* >> action leads to (more 05 Oct 2009 13:31:07 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49098 Hauke Laging wrote: > My aim is to let people publish their keys without being afraid that *this* > action leads to (more) spam. Have you considered 05 Oct 2009 12:14:42 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49096 Am Montag 05 Oktober 2009 schrieb Robert J. Hansen: > Proposals like this come up a lot. I have yet to see one which I think > really understands th 05 Oct 2009 11:27:01 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49095 I have removed the IETF list from the follow-up. I don't think this proposal is ripe for consideration by the specification community. >> The descri 05 Oct 2009 10:47:35 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49094 Hi Hauke-- Interesting proposal (about digesting User IDs), but i suspect that the ietf's openpgp working group is a better place to discuss this kin 04 Oct 2009 21:28:31 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49087 Hello, I would like to propose a small change to gpg (which I cannot do myself as I am not a programmer) which should solve the spammers harvest key 04 Oct 2009 19:08:59 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49086 On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 14:31, cvs@cvs.gnupg.org said: > New Revision: 5171 > > Modified: > trunk/g10/ChangeLog > trunk/g10/encr-data.c > trunk/g 02 Oct 2009 04:39:14 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49080 On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:19, simon@josefsson.org said: > PKCS#1 struct too? Does the smartcard validate the PKCS#1 data in any > way before signing it 30 Sep 2009 07:00:46 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49068 Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> writes: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:46, simon@josefsson.org said: >> Hi! Before I spend time testing it, can the OpenPGP car 30 Sep 2009 05:19:43 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49066 On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:46, simon@josefsson.org said: > Hi! Before I spend time testing it, can the OpenPGP card support > RSA-SHA2 signatures? The v 29 Sep 2009 04:38:00 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49060 Hi! Before I spend time testing it, can the OpenPGP card support RSA-SHA2 signatures? /Simon _______________________________________________ Gnupg- 29 Sep 2009 00:46:16 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49059 On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:50, klaus@flittner.org said: > in the specification[1] the algorithm attributes contain a field for > the length of the public 27 Sep 2009 04:06:37 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49050 On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 07:25, kevhilton@gmail.com said: > Its obvious I dont know a lot about svn, however I used the svn switch > command to switch repo 27 Sep 2009 04:04:35 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49049 Its obvious I dont know a lot about svn, however I used the svn switch command to switch repositories, but I'm still getting the libassuan error about 26 Sep 2009 22:25:41 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49047 Hello, in the specification[1] the algorithm attributes contain a field for the length of the public exponent. The available implementation of the ca 26 Sep 2009 15:50:18 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49046 Hi, I recently created a new branch for GnuPG 2.0. svn://cvs.gnupg.org/gnupg/branches/STABLE-BRANCH-2-0 is what you want. Use svn switch to upda 26 Sep 2009 11:15:50 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49045 On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 14:54, kevhilton@gmail.com said: > I currently have only libassuan 1.0.5 installed and the program is > asking for 1.1.0. When v 26 Sep 2009 11:09:57 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49044 Attempted compiling gnupg2 svn 5163 this am on ubuntu -- getting this error: configure: *** *** You need libassuan with Pth support to build this pro 26 Sep 2009 05:54:44 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/49041 Am Montag, 21. September 2009 10:15:05 schrieb Werner Koch: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:50, bernhard@intevation.de said: > > following algorithms anymore 22 Sep 2009 05:36:00 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48973 On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:50, bernhard@intevation.de said: > following algorithms anymore: > 2 - RSA Encrypt-Only [HAC] > 3 21 Sep 2009 01:15:05 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48962 On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:54, stefan.lorenz@stud.uni-saarland.de said: > The main question is, whether it is possible, maybe using the > Algorithm type 21 Sep 2009 01:11:56 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48961 On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:04, philcerf@googlemail.com said: >> (The exception is if you put a comment in that says the key is "insecure" or >> "do not u 21 Sep 2009 01:03:40 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48960 Hello, I am sorry for posting again, but we didn't find a solution to the problem yet and didn't get any responses so far. The main question is, wh 17 Sep 2009 05:54:23 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48940 Am Mittwoch, 16. September 2009 14:34:29 schrieb Rex Dieter: > > Does the pinentry-qt4 binary work on the command line, aka > > ./pinentry-qt4 > > GET 17 Sep 2009 02:05:29 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48938 Bernhard Reiter wrote: >> Anyone having luck getting pinentry-qt4 to work? ... >> 2009-09-13 14:24:55 gpg-agent[27662] starting a new PIN Entry >> g 16 Sep 2009 05:34:29 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48928 > Anyone having luck getting pinentry-qt4 to work? Yes, works in gpg4win 2.0.1rc1 and I could just complie it and run it for pinentry-0.7.6 on lenn 16 Sep 2009 04:58:51 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48926 It seems that some GnuPG2 2.0.12 packages do not import old keys with the deprecated following algorithms anymore: 2 - RSA Encryp 16 Sep 2009 02:50:58 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48925 Hi all, we are working on experimental algorithms and tried to incorporate different signing algorithms into gpg. We created a public key package, 14 Sep 2009 06:34:33 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48918 On Sep 13, 2009, at 4:22 PM, Philippe Cerfon wrote: > On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 8:13 PM, David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com> > wrote: >> You can get m 13 Sep 2009 13:54:01 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48911 On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 8:13 PM, David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com> wrote: > You can get more secure memory by changing the call to secmem_init in gpg 13 Sep 2009 13:22:57 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48910 Anyone having luck getting pinentry-qt4 to work? Both -qt and -gtk-2 seems to work ok for me, but as soon as I try -qt4, gpg-agent fails, my debug- 13 Sep 2009 13:02:06 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48909 On Sep 13, 2009, at 1:07 PM, Philippe Cerfon wrote: > Hi. > > For those wo are interested,... ;) > > I've aborted trying to create a 65536 bit RSA ke 13 Sep 2009 11:13:03 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48907 On Sep 13, 2009, at 1:04 PM, Philippe Cerfon wrote: > On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 12:28 AM, David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com> > wrote: >> GPG generall 13 Sep 2009 11:03:49 -0800 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/devel/48906