-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/08/08 06:17, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:03:15AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> God doesn't like Kiwis?
>
> Which god?
FSM, of course!
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, th
Chris Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 03:23:04PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 02:17:47 +1200
> > Chris Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > The weird thing is, it works for other people. Googling on the radix64
> >
> > Including me; I impor
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 01:05:14PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 23:18:01 +1200
> Chris Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Chris,
>
> > Are you running etch?
>
> No, Lenny here. GnuPG reports it's version 1.4.6.
Version: 1.4.6-2 for me on etch.
Although, it seems
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 23:18:01 +1200
Chris Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Chris,
> Are you running etch?
No, Lenny here. GnuPG reports it's version 1.4.6.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately apparent"
You're a sid
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 07:53:34PM +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
> How does your DNS server resolve subkeys.pgp.net? I see five different
> IP addresses, with preference given to either 213.239.206.174 or
> 64.71.173.107. Try if you still have this problem when you specify one
> of these IPs as the
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 03:23:04PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 02:17:47 +1200
> Chris Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Chris,
>
> > The weird thing is, it works for other people. Googling on the radix64
>
> Including me; I imported all three of the keys you ment
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:03:15AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> God doesn't like Kiwis?
Which god?
> But seriously, have you tried the verbose option?
Yes.
> > P.S. Also happens to keys: C02440B8 73CDA455
>
> They all work for me...
>
> $ gpg -v --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 73CDA455
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 06:12 -0700, Frank McCormick wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 13:45:47 +0100
> Brad Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:41:08 +0200
> > Jochen Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Jochen,
>
Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> How does your DNS server resolve subkeys.pgp.net? I see five different
Follow up to my last fup; no, maradns isn't the solution, sorry.
Using the IPs works, DNS times out apparently.
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advance
Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 02:17:47 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Sorry to jump in mid thread, but since this issue has popped up I
> > thought I'd mention a problem I've been having.
> >
> > $ gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 330C4
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 02:17:47 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
[...]
> Sorry to jump in mid thread, but since this issue has popped up I
> thought I'd mention a problem I've been having.
>
> $ gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 330C4A75
> gpg: requesting key 330C4A75 from hkp server sub
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 02:17:47 +1200
Chris Bannister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Chris,
> The weird thing is, it works for other people. Googling on the radix64
Including me; I imported all three of the keys you mentioned without
problems. Sorry, but I don't know enough about GPG & the serve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/07/08 09:17, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 01:45:47PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:41:08 +0200
>> Jochen Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Jochen,
>>
>>> $ gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --rec
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 01:45:47PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:41:08 +0200
> Jochen Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Jochen,
>
> > $ gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 3710949B
> > gpg: requesting key 3710949B from hkp server subkeys.pgp.net
> > gpg: key
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 10:20:54AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> I use mutt, and it invokes gpg which tries to grab keys it doesn't
> already have with the same symptom... up to about 60 seconds of
> waiting. What I don't know is what's happening during that
On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 10:20:54 -0700
Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Andrew,
> waiting. What I don't know is what's happening during that wait. Is it
> a matter of gpg not being able to contact the servers or do the
> servers take that long to run the query. It seems to run in
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 08:25:35AM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 20:17:54 -0700
> Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Andrew,
>
> > What keyserver are you using Brad? I typically use mit, but the lag
>
> hkp://subkeys.pgp.net
>
> > days because it takes t
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 07:29:16 -0400
Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Frank,
> No, Frank also knows, That key was uploaded months ago.
Yes, of course you do. My comment was not meant to reflect on you in
any way.
It's just typical that things updated at about the time of my prob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 08:25:35 +0100
Brad Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 20:17:54 -0700
> Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > What keyserver are you using Brad? I typically use mit, but the lag
> Was it me
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 20:17:54 -0700
Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Andrew,
> What keyserver are you using Brad? I typically use mit, but the lag
hkp://subkeys.pgp.net
> days because it takes too long. I finally just now waited it
> out... about 45 seconds (okay, I guess I'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/05/08 22:17, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 03:56:00PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:12:14 -0400
>> Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Frank,
>>
>>> Typical is right - half the s
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 03:56:00PM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:12:14 -0400
> Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Frank,
>
> > Typical is right - half the signed messages I get can't be verified.
>
> For me, that's a rare occurrence. Hence my calling att
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:12:14 -0400
Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Frank,
> Typical is right - half the signed messages I get can't be verified.
For me, that's a rare occurrence. Hence my calling attention to your
posts. As some would say; "Go figure"
--
Regards _
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 13:45:47 +0100
Brad Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:41:08 +0200
> Jochen Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello Jochen,
>
> > $ gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 3710949B
> > gpg: requesti
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:41:08 +0200
Jochen Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Jochen,
> $ gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 3710949B
> gpg: requesting key 3710949B from hkp server subkeys.pgp.net
> gpg: key 3710949B: "Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" not changed
> gpg: Total numb
Brad Rogers:
> Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> All's well that ends.
>
> Indeed.
>
> Now, where is your PGP public key? It doesn't appear to be on the
> regular servers. As such, signing messages is, pretty much, redundant.
$ gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 3710949
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:27:59 -0400
Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Frank,
> All's well that ends.
Indeed.
Now, where is your PGP public key? It doesn't appear to be on the
regular servers. As such, signing messages is, pretty much, redundant.
--
Regards _
/ )
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
For future reference--- I had a GTK2.0-rc file sitting in my home dir.
Drove Gnome absolutely nuts!!
All's well that ends.
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:46:23 -0400
Frank McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash
28 matches
Mail list logo
