Re: gnupg problem
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> "Joseph" == Joseph Pingenot <email@example.com> writes:
Joseph> 0) Application calls, say, pgp with pgp syntax.
Joseph> 1) A pgp-xlat package (?), maintained by the PGP person, is used
Joseph> to translate the pgp commandline to the generic commandline.
Joseph> It would create a PGP->dpgpw translation, invoking dpgpw at
Joseph> the end. PGP wouldn't necessarily need to be installed, only
Joseph> pgp-xlat, which would have a pgp->dpgpw translation wrapper in,
Joseph> say, /usr/bin/pgp. If PGP happens to be installed, it could be
Joseph> called, say, /usr/bin/pgp-real.
Joseph> 2) dpgpw then uses the dpgpw-<implementation> wrapper to translate
Joseph> the generic syntax to the implementation-specific syntax
Joseph> 3) the implementation is called and all goes on as if pgp were
Joseph> actually called.
Ohh. That sounds really complicated. I doubt it'll fly. (Not that
there would be a problem technically. I don't think people would want
to use that.)
Joseph> This would *might* go a *ways* to making *most* front-ends be
Joseph> able to use *most* pgp implementations, but the best solution
Joseph> still remains getting frontend developers and pgp implementers
Joseph> to sit down and unify on these things.
IMHO, the best solution would be to get everyone to stop using pgp and
use gnupg instead, but that seems unlikely to happen either.
Joseph> Sure is a fun puzzle to problem-solve, though. ;)
I agree. And I think it would be fun to try to implement a solution
given enough time. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone has that kind of
Hubert Chan <firstname.lastname@example.org> - http://www.geocities.com/hubertchan/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/71FDA37F
Fingerprint: 6CC5 822D 2E55 494C 81DD 6F2C 6518 54DF 71FD A37F
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Please encrypt *all* e-mail to me.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----