Am Samstag, den 20.02.2016, 19:47 +0100 schrieb Stig Roar Wangberg: > la. den 20. 02. 2016 klokka 19.31 (+0100) skreiv Stig Roar Wangberg: > > la. den 20. 02. 2016 klokka 19.03 (+0100) skreiv Tom: > > > Am Samstag, den 20.02.2016, 16:56 +0100 schrieb Stig Roar Wangberg: > > > > to. den 11. 02. 2016 klokka 18.39 (+0000) skreiv Pete Biggs: > > > > > > What about this, then? Does this say anything about why there's > > > > > > always > > > > > > two .dat-files attached together with the encrypted attachment? > > > > > > > > > > > > --=-FBjrxYQ2/8R5tscH+TLU > > > > > > Content-Type: application/pgp-encrypted; name="dat.asc" > > > > > > Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="dat.asc" > > > > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 > > > > > > > > > > > > And if so, what does it tell me? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As the "Content-Type:" says, that's the PGP encrypted attachment. > > > > > > > > > > I don't know why there are two .dat files. > > > > > > > > > > If you want, forward the mail (as an attachment) to me and I'll have a > > > > > look at it. But it won't be immediately. > > > > > > > > > > P. > > > > > > > > Everything is working just fine now! I'm very pleased with Evolution. > > > > But what does it mean when it says that the signature is valid, but > > > > cannot confirm the sender (I don't know the exact wording in English)? > > > > > > I think it is the same what I see here: > > > Signatur existiert, jedoch wird der öffentliche Schlüssel benötigt. > > > or > > > gpg: Signatur am Sa 20 Feb 2016 16:56:34 CET mit RSA Schlüssel, ID > > > 7C174863, erfolgt. > > > gpg: Unterschrift kann nicht geprüft werden: Öffentlicher Schlüssel > > > nicht gefunden. > > > > > > I haven't checked the English UI but it could there sound like: > > > Signature exists but the public key however is needed/required. > > > or > > > gpg: Signature at the Sa 20 Feb 2016 16:56:34 CET with RSA key, ID > > > 7C174863, is carried out. > > > gpg: Signature cannot be checked: Public key not found. > > > > Oh, I was expecting this from others, like when I don't trust or sign > > their keys. Hm. I didn't expect from my own private key. So I have to > > sign and trust my own key too! Like gpg --sign, and level of trust. I > > wonder if I should trust myself with level 5 ... ;) > > > I did a gpg --edit-key, ran the check and it was already self-signed. So > I did the trust in addition. This is the first time I trust myself. ;) > So this is the correct procedure, right? If so I learned something new. > Again! > ... still no public key provided :-(
_______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
