Are there any mail clients around other than Mutt that sign and
encrypt messages the way Mutt does? Nobody I know is able to read my
signed messages or verify my signatures, and the signatures seem to
cause problems with some mailreaders. For instance, the message body
shows up blank, and what I wrote only shows up in a text attachment
(which, sadly enough, some people fail to notice and completely miss
what I wrote).
I read the rationale (or rather, what I believe to be the rationale)
for this in PGP-Notes.txt, in the answer to the question, "I don't
like that PGP/MIME stuff, but want to use the old way of PGP-signing
my mails. Can't you include that with mutt?" I don't understand why
"Application/pgp is not really suited to a world with MIME,
non-textual body parts and similar things." What exactly was wrong
with the old way of signing e-mails, with "-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED
MESSAGE-----" and such? What is the benefit to PGP/MIME?
--
=== ALL USERS PLEASE NOTE ========================
Compiler optimizations have been made to macro expand LET into a WITHOUT-
INTERRUPTS special form so that it can PUSH things into a stack in the
LET-OPTIMIZATION area, SETQ the variables and then POP them back when it's
done. Don't worry about this unless you use multiprocessing.
Note that LET *could* have been defined by:
(LET ((LET '`(LET ((LET ',LET))
,LET)))
`(LET ((LET ',LET))
,LET))
This is believed to speed up execution by as much as a factor of 1.01 or
3.50 depending on whether you believe our friendly marketing representatives.
This code was written by a new programmer here (we snatched him away from
Itty Bitti Machines where we was writting COUGHBOL code) so to give him
confidence we trusted his vows of "it works pretty well" and installed it.
PGP signature
