Injecting Status-fd output
nicholas.cole at gmail.com
Thu Mar 8 17:12:39 CET 2007
On 3/8/07, Werner Koch <wk at gnupg.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:50, nicholas.cole at gmail.com said:
> > Usually, I read the --status-fd output and the statard output
> > seperately, but obviously this has its own problems.
> gpg should make sure that this is syncronized.
Interesting. I hadn't realised this. I've been using the popen2
module in python, which seems to break this, even if I disable
buffering. I can't seem to find a way of calling gpg that would let
me take advantage of whatever it is trying to do.
> This is an old problem [injected status lines] and something we can't easily fix. Detecting
> this marker in the plaintext is of course possible but what shall we
> do about it? We would need to modify the message and thus break a lot
> of applications. It might we possible to do this for the case of
> status-fd and output writing to stdout only.
I guess that the only way to fix it without breaking existing apps
would be to add an option like:
and put [GNUPG PLAINTEXT] at the front of each.
Or am I missing something obvious?
More information about the Gnupg-devel