On Sunday 30 May 2010, Daniel Eggleston wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 00:58:57 + (UTC)
>
> "Michael D. Berger" wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:46:29 -0500, John Clizbe wrote:
> > > Michael D. Berger wrote:
> > >> On a Linux box, in encrypting a file with gpg, I get this query:
> > >>It i
On Sun, 30 May 2010 00:58:57 + (UTC)
"Michael D. Berger" wrote:
> On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:46:29 -0500, John Clizbe wrote:
>
> > Michael D. Berger wrote:
> >> On a Linux box, in encrypting a file with gpg, I get this query:
> >>
> >>It is NOT certain that the key belongs to the person nam
thanks for the reply. i'll install and give it a try ...
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: RIPEMD160
> Hi,
>> i have gnuPG 1.4.7 currently installed on windows xp
>> i want to install gnuPG 2.0.14
>> question: will there be any compatibility issues with my current keys, etc?
> Non
that i did not realize Charly, thank you for bringing that to my attention
> Olav Seyfarth wrote the following on 5/28/10 1:07 AM:
>> Hi,
>>> i have gnuPG 1.4.7 currently installed on windows xp
>>> i want to install gnuPG 2.0.14
>>> question: will there be any compatibility issues with my curre
On 5/29/2010 5:58 PM, Michael D. Berger wrote:
> I went to the account in which the key pair was generated
> and tried to sign the key. I got that the key is already
> signed. Was there perhaps something in the export of
> the public key that might have gone wrong? Or, perhaps,
> is there some o
