[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: pseudo RFP: fortunes-debian (was: Re: Future of Debian uncertain?)



On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 13:41, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:

> On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 13:33, Patrick McFarland wrote:
> > On 26-Feb-2003, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: 
> 
> Patrick:
> 
> gpg: BAD signature from "Patrick McFarland (Diablo-D3) <unknown@panax.com>"
> 
> This is evolution 1.2.2 here. You're using mutt 1.5.3. Yet another
> mutt/evolution problem? I thought these were finally solved by evolution
> 1.2.2...
> 
Nope, they just closed the bug and decided not to fix it.

Evolution rewrites (yes REWRITES) quoted-printable e-mails before
verifying them.  That's just wrong.

It separates the mail, then decodes the parts.  When it comes to verify,
it recodes the signed part again.  Mutt and Evolution encode
quoted-printable mails slightly differently.

I can understand their upset that the PGP/MIME standard says you sign
the *encoded* part, rather than the decoded part; but that's no reason
to simply write brain-dead code.

Scott
-- 
Scott James Remnant     Have you ever, ever felt like this?  Had strange
http://netsplit.com/      things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: