I can handle the GPG stuff for now, it's not a big deal. I'll just learn to
type my passphrase faster. ;) However...
Spake Thomas F on 6/21/2002, at 11:41:40 +0700:
> I believe he means in the context of hitting PgDown. However, by
> hitting PgDown, he keeps actively pushing the end-of-message mark
> further down, rather than passively detecting it.
What I mean is partially that, and partially that because TB! sees the EOM
as being the last line of text in the message, any GPG signatures come
directly after that. So you have something like:
This is the end of my signature.
------ Begin GPG Signature -------
<GnuPG information>
-------- End GPG Signature -------
This looks a lot cleaner than it actually is. I know it's only a cosmetic
bug, but I can't tell TB! that the last line in my message is actually a
blank line, to give something like this:
This is the end of my signature.
----- Begin GPG Signature -----
<GnuPG information>
------ End GPG Signature ------
Which is much easier to read. Now granted, signatures will be stripped from
most MUAs that understand PGP/GPG, but for those that don't, it gets
confusing to read.
On that note, I seem to remember something about the OpenPGP specifying how
the signature was to be included -- was it by attachment, or by inclusion at
EOM? I don't see anything in the RFC...
________________________________________________________
Current Ver: 1.60q
FAQ : http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
