New encrypt-files option - CVS code

David Shaw dshaw at
Wed Jan 9 16:41:01 CET 2002

On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 07:03:57AM +0100, Timo Schulz wrote:
> On Tue Jan 08 2002; 18:23, David Shaw wrote:
> > I'm curious - why not just allow --encrypt to handle multiple files
> > rather than using a new command?
> We could do this also, but the new code only conists of some
> lines. Plus we need a status for each file which is not supported
> by encode_crypt. Do you think it's too much to support this command?

Oh, not at all.  I think the new command is great.

I was just thinking that when --encrypt-files is given only one
argument it almost identical to --encrypt... so why not just rename
"--encrypt-files" as "--encrypt" and have one command?  It would need
a slight tweak to handle stdin, but that's easy.  (Would the status
stuff cause a problem here?)

It would be simpler to explain and document and we won't get questions
to the mailing list asking what the differences between the two
commands are :)


   David Shaw  |  dshaw at  |  WWW
   "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
      We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson

More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list