also sprach Adeodato Simó <asp16@alu.ua.es> [2005.05.19.0137 +0200]:
> Check your side, martin, verified fine here.
also sprach Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> [2005.05.19.0211 +0200]:
> All signatures in this thread so far have verified fine for me.
That's curious. My setup works, and it has worked for a while.
I have not seen a bad signature in months. Yet, from a recent post:
[-- PGP output follows (current time: Thu 19 May 2005 07:41:18 CEST) --]
gpg: Signature made Thu 19 May 2005 03:53:56 CEST using DSA key ID 74CEA76A
[GNUPG:] BADSIG 4DF868A274CEA76A Roberto Sanchez <rcsanchez97@sbcglobal.net>
gpg: BAD signature from "Roberto Sanchez <rcsanchez97@sbcglobal.net>"
[-- End of PGP output --]
[-- The following data is signed --]
... there is also a post where the signature verifies...
One of the messages which fails to verify is here:
http://madduck.net/~madduck/scratch/mutt-cirrus-1000-8080-10
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :' : proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
"no survivors? then where do the stories come from I wonder?"
-- jack sparrow
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature