OpenPGP library?

[Werner Koch]

On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:30:15 +0100, Matthew Byng-Maddick said:

> I don't want to argue with the rest of this message, however there are some
> obvious things standing out here, and before you say "well, submit a patch",
> I have, and it was very obviously ignored.

Actually those 2 mails are ticked as important in my mailer and I
think it is really a good idea.  I am currently working through the
bug list and as soon as I have fixed all the important things, I am
going to add some new functionality.  

Without a copyright assignment I am not able to apply your patch but I
will rewrite it so that it will give a similar result.  And GPGME will
of course take advantage of that features.  

> checking a signature, for example, doesn't need to have the private key,
> having this kind of functionality in a library would be *extremely* useful.

I agree with you here.  If you start using a an interface like GPGME
we can later very easy increase the performance -- if there is no
other way to do it, we might as well include signature checking code
into GPGME, the current plan however is to run gpg as a coprocess so
there is no fork overhead anymore.  

There are some stupid things in gpg which make it really slow; I first
want to address this before even thinking of other performance fixes.
I did some tests with the signature verification code in GPGME and if
the new coprocess model is used, it will be not noticable slower than
direct linking.  

Ciao,

  Werner


-- 
Werner Koch        Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur
g10 Code GmbH      et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est.
Privacy Solutions                                        -- Augustinus