Extracting valid content; command line use of --edit-key
mwy-gpg41 at the-youngs.org
Wed Apr 3 14:55:20 CEST 2002
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Thanks to both Timo and Werner for the quick answers. I should
have realized that other input was being taken from the command
line, given the hanging/saving behavior.
From: Werner Koch <wk at gnupg.org>
> Let me stress that you MUST act on the GET_* status lines and stop
> processing if you encounter a line which you don't understand (you may
> try to send just an empty line in such a case so a default can be
> used). The rationale is that --edit-key is an interactive menu driver
> command which may change from version to version; for example the
> current snapshot might issue some new prompts when signing a key.
I was really hoping that the command-line form of "--edit-key" would
be less interactive, particularly in the presence of a "--batch"
setting. I want a "do what I say without asking any questions" form.
If one MUST act on the status lines, then there is no legitimate
way to put "--edit-key" parameters on the command line -- it has
to be formulated before seeing any of the status material. But
command-line parameters are clearly accepted.
In order to make command-line parameters usable, I would:
take only the menu commands and their fixed parameters on the
use the existing status mechanism for any confirmations or
questions (including commands if the command line has none); and,
abide by the "--yes" and "--batch" switches whenever possible.
- From Timo's answer, it sounds like he doesn't use command-line
menu commands, so he wouldn't be affected.
I'm not asking for much, am I? :-)
In the meanwhile, I'll probably just take my chances on the
interactive sequences changing. It might just be easier to write
my own packet-cruncher than a status parser.
Speaking of parsing and such, is it safe to assume that the uid lines
in the "--with-colons" form appear in the same order as in the
"--edit-key" listing? If it is not, then that's yet one more thing
I'd have to parse. The whole point to --with-colons is to simplify
parsing, so I'm guessing/hoping that the answer is "yes".
Thanks again for your help!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-devel