New encrypt-files option - CVS code

Timo Schulz ts at
Wed Jan 9 17:44:01 CET 2002

On Wed Jan 09 2002; 10:31, David Shaw wrote:

> 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?)

Okay, you're right but I think about another stdin handling then
--encrypt use. It would be very useful to use the similar style
like verify_files. Then you can put the filenames to stdin and
if there is no stdin data each given file will be encrypt.

> 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 :)

My first mistake was the wishy-washy explation when you use
--help. This is now fixed and I believe with the new helper text
nobody asks this again.


More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list