On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Doug Barton <do...@dougbarton.us> wrote: > You're approaching this problem from the standpoint of unattended > usage, which is not how the current command line behavior was intended. > > > Doug >
Okay, I can work around it in a satisfactory fashion. My personal problem is solved. Now, assuming that --batch is supposed to make gpg run in an unattended fashion, as documentation indicates, and behavior differs in this case between encrypt and decrypt, is there any reason this isn't a bug (albeit very minor) that should be reported? If so, should I start with the gnupg-devel mailing list, or create an account with the bug tracking system and create there? Thank you all for your help. Andrew _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
