On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 21:10:30 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
[...]
> If XCA has _any_ documentation at all, it is already better than TinyCA2 in
> something.
It has a lot of HTML documentation. However, the GUI is easy to use, I
never needed to look into the documentation.
> Mind
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009, Tino Keitel wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 22:18:15 +0100, Marcus Better wrote:
> > > * Package name: xca
> > > Description : x509 Certification Authority management tool based on
> > > QT4
> >
> > Is there anything significant that distinguishes this from TinyCA
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 22:18:15 +0100, Marcus Better wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tino Keitel wrote:
>
> > * Package name: xca
> > Description : x509 Certification Authority management tool based on
> > QT4
>
> Is there anything significant that disti
I demand that Marcus Better may or may not have written...
> Tino Keitel wrote:
>> * Package name: xca
>> Description : x509 Certification Authority management tool based on QT4
> Is there anything significant that distinguishes this from TinyCA?
Other than it not being GTK-based? I ca
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tino Keitel wrote:
> * Package name: xca
> Description : x509 Certification Authority management tool based on
> QT4
Is there anything significant that distinguishes this from TinyCA?
Cheers,
Marcus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Versio
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tino Keitel
* Package name: xca
Version : 0.6.4
Upstream Author : Name
* URL : http://xca.sourceforge.net/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C++
Description : x509 Certification Authority management tool based o
6 matches
Mail list logo
