Hello list, I was recently trying to encrypt a payload using fingerprints in my keyring to most unambiguously identify a key, when I encountered the following confusion. After giving up trying to find resolution via search engine I played with it a bit more I got it to work, but the head-scratching is, I think, unnecessary.
Here's what I did: gpg --list-keys --fingerprint In the output is a line like: Key fingerprint = 560D 1AD1 81D9 81C2 D5D1 005F 10CA 1074 B50F 855E However, one cannot paste that string into gpg --encrypt --recipient, getting the "no public key" message, as one might expect. One can after removing the spaces, however. Two of the more obvious solution categories include: * Removing the otherwise helpful padding in the spaces between nibbles and decabytes * Expanding --recipient parsing code to accept this format Stepping back a bit, software and users that want to deal in fingerprints might be very different than software and users who want to deal in short ids and email addresses, and it might be nice to have a restricted --recipient option that only supports safe, unambiguous addressing of keys. I think I'm in the latter category. In any case, I think the output of the program should be, in this case, usable as input. Thoughts? -- fdr _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users