Hi! Am Dienstag, den 15.04.2008, 20:35 -0500 schrieb Robert J. Hansen:
> > Even if those subpacktes would be used in my suggested way, each > > implementation would know "Nanana, 3DES is a fallback, so in each case I > > can find my algorithm match", but in addition to that a user could force > > his implementation (via a non conforming switch) to ignore that fallback > > stuff, and just look at the preference. If he'll have problems with this > > (interoperability) it's his own problem. > > Arguing "GnuPG should support a nonconformant extension to the spec" is > probably not going to get much of anywhere. In a way, those switches are already there, look at "--cipher-algo name", "--digest-algo name" and "--compress-algo name" vs. the "--personal-...-preferences" parameters. These ignore the preference flags altogether. cu, Sven _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
