Re: rsync removes the "N" from mailboxes with new mail
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 07:00:46PM -0500, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote: > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 14:17:49 -0600, Derek Martin wrote: > > $ stat rsyncfrom/* > > File: `rsyncfrom/bar' > > Size: 0 Blocks: 0 IO Block: 4096 regular empty file > > Device: 805h/2053d Inode: 41984 Links: 1 > > Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--) Uid: (24574/demartin) Gid: ( 600/ staff) > > Access: 2011-03-08 15:45:52.0 -0500 > > Modify: 2011-03-08 15:45:52.0 -0500 > > Change: 2011-03-08 15:45:52.0 -0500 > [...] > > > > HOWEVER, NONE OF THE TIMES OF THE SOURCE FILES HAVE BEEN UPDATED. > > Like John, in my tests rsync both with and without "-t" updates the > access time of the original file (see session log below) > Yes, I think (as one would expect from what the rsync man page says) that rsync doesn't *intentionally* do anything clever with the access time. Either it always changes it or it never changes it and the -t option doesn't make any difference. As suggested it's probably the presence or otherwise of the noatime option in fstab that makes the difference. -- Chris Green
[OT] GPG signature fails
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 12:36:36PM -0600, Derek Martin wrote: Derek, I do appreciate you signing all your mails to this list, but each and every one of them shows up as a bad signature and I'm not sure whether you are aware of this or not. I've tried to contact you about this outside this list, but you don't make it very easy for people to contact you directly. Sincerely, Remco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] GPG signature fails
On 03/13/2011 06:11 AM, Remco Rijnders wrote: > Derek, > > I do appreciate you signing all your mails to this list, but each and > every one of them shows up as a bad signature and I'm not sure whether > you are aware of this or not. > > I've tried to contact you about this outside this list, but you don't > make it very easy for people to contact you directly. Something must be broken with your MUA or OpenPGP implementation. All of his signatures come in clean for me. I haven't seen a bad signature from him on this list. OpenPGP Security Info UNTRUSTED Good signature from Derek D. Martin Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 / Signed on: 03/10/2011 11:36 AM Key fingerprint: B5F7 DC7F F7B9 A9E2 5AE2 9002 1C49 C048 DFBE AD02 -- . o . o . o . . o o . . . o . . . o . o o o . o . o o . . o o o o . o . . o o o o . o o o signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [OT] GPG signature fails
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 06:32:54AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: On 03/13/2011 06:11 AM, Remco Rijnders wrote: Derek, I do appreciate you signing all your mails to this list, but each and every one of them shows up as a bad signature and I'm not sure whether you are aware of this or not. I've tried to contact you about this outside this list, but you don't make it very easy for people to contact you directly. Something must be broken with your MUA or OpenPGP implementation. All of his signatures come in clean for me. I haven't seen a bad signature from him on this list. OpenPGP Security Info UNTRUSTED Good signature from Derek D. Martin Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 / Signed on: 03/10/2011 11:36 AM Key fingerprint: B5F7 DC7F F7B9 A9E2 5AE2 9002 1C49 C048 DFBE AD02 Possibly... but it consistently is with only Derek's emails. Your signature validates fine for example. Using mutt and gpg as available in / from Debian Squeeze. But if it is just me seeing this, then I'll try to investigate further on my end. Thanks for the feedback Aaron. Remco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] GPG signature fails
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 06:32:54AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > On 03/13/2011 06:11 AM, Remco Rijnders wrote: > > Derek, > > > > I do appreciate you signing all your mails to this list, but each and > > every one of them shows up as a bad signature and I'm not sure whether > > you are aware of this or not. > > > > I've tried to contact you about this outside this list, but you don't > > make it very easy for people to contact you directly. > > Something must be broken with your MUA or OpenPGP implementation. All of > his signatures come in clean for me. I haven't seen a bad signature from > him on this list. > > OpenPGP Security Info > > UNTRUSTED Good signature from Derek D. Martin > Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 / Signed on: 03/10/2011 11:36 AM > Key fingerprint: B5F7 DC7F F7B9 A9E2 5AE2 9002 1C49 C048 DFBE AD02 Actually, that was using Icedove. Using Mutt yeilds: [-- PGP output follows (current time: Sun 13 Mar 2011 06:59:00 AM MDT) --] gpg: Signature made Thu 10 Mar 2011 11:36:36 AM MST using DSA key ID DFBEAD02 gpg: BAD signature from "Derek D. Martin " [-- End of PGP output --] After running 'gpg --list-packets' on his signature, here's what I get: :signature packet: algo 17, keyid 1C49C048DFBEAD02 version 3, created 1299603262, md5len 5, sigclass 0x01 digest algo 2, begin of digest e3 50 data: [159 bits] data: [159 bits] He's using DSA with SHA1. Interesting that the output is 159 bits, and not 160 bits. Seahorse also complains about the signature, calling it bad. Interesting too that Enigmail with Icedove validates the signature, but Mutt fails. At any event, it does in fact appear that something is broken with his OpenPGP signatures, likely due to a misconfiguration in his ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf or muttrc. -- . o . o . o . . o o . . . o . . . o . o o o . o . o o . . o o o o . o . . o o o o . o o o signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: rsync removes the "N" from mailboxes with new mail
On Sat 12.Mar.11 19:00, Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 14:17:49 -0600, Derek Martin wrote: [...] Access: 2011-03-12 18:45:08.0 -0500 Modify: 2011-03-12 18:43:40.0 -0500 Change: 2011-03-12 18:45:08.0 -0500 (This is rsync v2.6.4 on a Linux 2.4.x ext2 filesystem with default mount options.) Just to point out that rsync v2.6.4 is pretty old. Current is 3.0.7. Even my Debian Lenny system (Lenny was released two years ago) is running 3.0.3. Perhaps there was a change in rsync's behavior since 2.6.4. Version 3.0.7 does not change the access times on my system. -- Dan McDaniel d...@dm3.us Key fingerprint = CAEC B8D9 3701 86CF D3B2 1E99 D8BB F217 455C AD36 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [OT] GPG signature fails
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 06:32:54AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote: > On 03/13/2011 06:11 AM, Remco Rijnders wrote: > > Derek, > > > > I do appreciate you signing all your mails to this list, but each and > > every one of them shows up as a bad signature and I'm not sure whether > > you are aware of this or not. > > > > I've tried to contact you about this outside this list, but you don't > > make it very easy for people to contact you directly. > > Something must be broken with your MUA or OpenPGP implementation. All of > his signatures come in clean for me. I haven't seen a bad signature from > him on this list. Derek's signature fails here as well, unlike yours and most others. Richard --- Name and OpenPGP keys available from pgp key servers pgpT965e4GmjS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Comodo Secure Email Certificate
Hi! I just applied for Comodo's free email certificate http://www.comodo.com/home/email-security/free-email-certificate.php How can it be used with mutt?
Re: Comodo Secure Email Certificate
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 05:42:46PM +0100, Veljko wrote: > Hi! > > I just applied for Comodo's free email certificate > http://www.comodo.com/home/email-security/free-email-certificate.php > > How can it be used with mutt? > In case anybody else is wondering how to do it, I found it: http://equiraptor.com/smime_mutt_how-to.html http://kb.wisc.edu/middleware/page.php?id=4091 Cheers!
