NIIBE Yutaka <gni...@fsij.org> wrote:
> Besides, in my opinion, the agent_cache_housekeeping function makes less
> sense (it's totally OK to only check the expiration on its use). Having
> expired entries on memory is no problem at all, than running gpg-agent
> process periodically; memory is cheap but buttery power is not (for my
> use case).
I was wrong. The ticket for agent_cache_housekeeping is:
https://dev.gnupg.org/T3829
It was introduced because of some risk keeping passphrase.
I'd like to consider to improve the implementation of cache and
expiration, not using handle_tick.
--
