Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 21:54:09 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat removed, linux to follow Message-ID: <20040704205409.GA61158@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20040704202309.GA30837@eyore.cobbled.net> References: <0E972CEE334BFE4291CD07E056C76ED802E86EBB@bragi.housing.ufl.edu> <40E59559.8090907@cronyx.ru> <p06002035bd0b4bebb128@[10.0.1.3]> <20040704202309.GA30837@eyore.cobbled.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--17pEHd4RhPHOinZp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 09:23:09PM +0100, n0g0013 wrote:
> what is the story with PGP signatures these days? last i
> investigated there was a multi-part mime format that was meant
> to be standard and nobody used (except mutt, which i use).
>=20
> does anyone use that format or is it all inline now? mutt
> won't recognise the inline format as signed (and consequently
> won't verify the content).
It's a case of duelling standards: RFC 2633 vs RFC 3156. You should
be able to verify RFC 2633 messages using openssl's smime capability.
Cheers,
Matthew
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks
Savill Way
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow
Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK
--17pEHd4RhPHOinZp
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFA6G5xiD657aJF7eIRAmKbAJ9jBkQE/5zdY0kO2t4W2IjBKEbsoQCfQWh/
ooVoWPTNP1CdKz86NqoRTSw=
=9Tx5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--17pEHd4RhPHOinZp--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040704205409.GA61158>