* [sup-talk] gpg signatures are not valid of sig present
@ 2008-05-16 4:42 Jan Spakula
2008-05-19 21:41 ` William Morgan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jan Spakula @ 2008-05-16 4:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
Hello,
I've just recently discovered that gpg signatures generated by sup are
not verifiable (BAD signature result from gpg) on other e-mail clients
(tried with mutt and claws-mail), when I have nonempty signature. With
no signature present, all works fine. Sup can verify the signature
succesfully in either case though. (I'm using sup 0.5.)
I'm sorry, I'm no ruby programmer, so I don't know where the problem
could be; just by common sense it would seem that ruby strips the
message of the signature before dealing with gpg sig.
Thanks for help,
--
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [sup-talk] gpg signatures are not valid of sig present
2008-05-16 4:42 [sup-talk] gpg signatures are not valid of sig present Jan Spakula
@ 2008-05-19 21:41 ` William Morgan
2008-05-19 22:04 ` Jan Spakula
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: William Morgan @ 2008-05-19 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
Reformatted excerpts from Jan Spakula's message of 2008-05-15:
> I've just recently discovered that gpg signatures generated by sup are
> not verifiable (BAD signature result from gpg) on other e-mail clients
> (tried with mutt and claws-mail), when I have nonempty signature.
Turns out this was a newline issue. I think I've tracked it down. Do a
git pull and try again.
--
William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [sup-talk] gpg signatures are not valid of sig present
2008-05-19 21:41 ` William Morgan
@ 2008-05-19 22:04 ` Jan Spakula
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jan Spakula @ 2008-05-19 22:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Mon May 19 16:41:46 -0500 2008:
> Reformatted excerpts from Jan Spakula's message of 2008-05-15:
> > I've just recently discovered that gpg signatures generated by sup are
> > not verifiable (BAD signature result from gpg) on other e-mail clients
> > (tried with mutt and claws-mail), when I have nonempty signature.
>
> Turns out this was a newline issue. I think I've tracked it down. Do a
> git pull and try again.
Works now. Thanks for the fix!
--
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-05-19 22:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-05-16 4:42 [sup-talk] gpg signatures are not valid of sig present Jan Spakula
2008-05-19 21:41 ` William Morgan
2008-05-19 22:04 ` Jan Spakula
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox