> >* gpg: checking the trustdb
*> >* gpg: 3 marginal(s) needed, 1 complete(s) needed, PGP trust model*>
> It comes from gpg. I just pushed a fix for 2.1 toseilence it with --quiet.
I still get that output even when using --quiet
But maybe it is because I still have 2.1.11 (ubuntu 16.04)
Dashamir
Starting an other topic.
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 04/26/2016 06:37 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>
>> I've looked over your egpg code. My bloodless technical evaluation is
>> simple: "it is nowhere near ready for production environments." And I
>> think if you read
> I am, therefore, sending it again.
I've been hoping someone else would tackle this, since I'm not
particularly well-versed in PGP for OS X. I do run GnuPG on OS X,
though, so maybe I can be of some assistance.
I'm going to be posing a lot of questions here, but they're all
rhetorical -- they'r
On 04/26/2016 06:37 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
I've looked over your egpg code. My bloodless technical evaluation is
simple: "it is nowhere near ready for production environments." And I
think if you read over the other technical criticisms you've received,
you'll see this is pretty much a con
On 04/26/2016 02:40 PM, Bob (Robert) Cavanaugh wrote:
New thread for this topic...
For what it's worth, you didn't actually do that. What you did
was to change the subject line of your reply. For those of us who use
mail readers that actually thread, your message still appears under the
orig
Hi Dashamir,
Thanks for pointing to HAVEG(E), it was a new approach to me.
> One of the suggestions is to use haveged[1].
I don't think you meant to suggest this HAVEGE implementation [1] --
which is a PRNG based on the entrope of HAVEG -- but wanted to point out
a HAVEG implementation instead,
Thanks.
I hope someone can tell me what I might be doing wrong.
> On May 7, 2016, at 3:51 AM, Brad Rogers wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 May 2016 16:59:32 -0700
> Daniel H. Werner wrote:
>
> Hello Daniel,
>
>> I sent the following message several days ago and am not sure it
>
> Less than 24 hrs, acco
Hello Dashamir,
on Sat, 7 May 2016 14:18:39 +0200, you wrote:
>On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Carola Grunwald
>wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> on Wed, 4 May 2016 22:55:34 + (UTC), I wrote:
>>
>> >I need help with GnuPG 2.1.12 migrating an encryption tool from 1.4.20.
>> >
>> >I'm trying to run t
On Fri, 6 May 2016 16:59:32 -0700
Daniel H. Werner wrote:
Hello Daniel,
>I sent the following message several days ago and am not sure it
Less than 24 hrs, according to time stamps. The list archives would show
that the first copy was received.
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blin
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Carola Grunwald
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> on Wed, 4 May 2016 22:55:34 + (UTC), I wrote:
>
> >I need help with GnuPG 2.1.12 migrating an encryption tool from 1.4.20.
> >
> >I'm trying to run the --delete-secret-and-public-key command with the
> >passphrase entered t
Hello,
on Wed, 4 May 2016 22:55:34 + (UTC), I wrote:
>I need help with GnuPG 2.1.12 migrating an encryption tool from 1.4.20.
>
>I'm trying to run the --delete-secret-and-public-key command with the
>passphrase entered through stdin, which doesn't get activated ('delete
>key failed: No pinen
11 matches
Mail list logo
