On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 10:46:08PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > Urgh.. that's horrible. Would it make sense to install a root-owned > symlink to /dev/null in ~/.gnupg/secring.gpg ? I'm not sure if that > would break gpg functionality. Symlinking it to /dev/null wouldn't work, since it's a+rw by default. gpg will simply unlink the symlink and create a real secring.gpg. Instead, you could create a 0-byte file owned by root of the same name. [17:52:35] chewie@skuld (699)$ mv .gnupg .gnupg.bak [17:52:41] chewie@skuld (700)$ gpg --list-keys gpg: /home/chewie/.gnupg: directory created gpg: new configuration file `/home/chewie/.gnupg/gpg.conf' created gpg: WARNING: options in `/home/chewie/.gnupg/gpg.conf' are not yet active during this run gpg: keyring `/home/chewie/.gnupg/pubring.gpg' created [17:52:42] chewie@skuld (703)$ sudo touch .gnupg/secring.gpg [17:52:55] chewie@skuld (704)$ gpg --import chewie.gpg gpg: no default secret keyring: eof gpg: error reading `chewie.gpg': general error gpg: import from `chewie.gpg' failed: general error gpg: Total number processed: 0 gpg: secret keys read: 1 It's not a very descriptive error, however. This would be better: "gpg: cannot write to default secret keyring: ..." Oh well. -- Chad Walstrom <chewie@wookimus.net> http://www.wookimus.net/ assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature