Re: GPG says bad signature when PGP reports OK

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: GPG says bad signature when PGP reports OK
From: "Marco d'Itri" <md@linux.it>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:51:38 +0100
Message-id: <19991118235138.A3845@wonderland.linux.it>
In-reply-to: <19991118075052.A17709@snoopy.apana.org.au>; from bam@debian.org on Thu, Nov 18, 1999 at 07:50:52AM +1100
References: <19991118075052.A17709@snoopy.apana.org.au>

On Nov 17, Brian May <bam@debian.org> wrote:
 
 >What does the rfc1991 option do? I thought I once saw
It's related to pgp 2.x encryption. Don't use it.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

Reply to:

References:
- Re: GPG says bad signature when PGP reports OK
  - From: Brian May <bam@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: why does start-stop-daemon not support --chgid ?
Next by Date: Re: why does start-stop-daemon not support --chgid ?
Previous by thread: Re: rfc1991: required or not? Was: Re: GPG says bad signature when PGP reports OK
Next by thread: Linux developers for Bay Area startup
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread