On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, Bertram Scharpf wrote:
> It was about encryption: If I write a
> message, then encrypt it for the recipient and keep just the
> encrypted copy, I will later not be able to read what I
> wrote myself. I suggested an option that added myself to the
> recipients list when calling GnuPG or OpenSSL.
What's wrong with doing that?
gpg:
--encrypt-to name
Same as --recipient but this one is intended for use in the
options file and may be used with your own user-id as an
"encrypt-to-self". These keys are only used when there are other
recipients given either by use of --recipient or by the asked
user id. No trust checking is performed for these user ids and
even disabled keys can be used.
> should configure GnuPG to do what I want. In plain language:
"Don't duplicate functionality"
Maybe if you explain why you need this option in mutt it would help...
