chris at netservers.co.uk
Fri May 31 14:17:01 CEST 2002
Hi Werner and the list,
> There is batch ke generation - see doc/DETAILS.
Sorry, my bad. This looks like what I need.
> This can't be done easily. You need to present a lot of information
> to the user so that he can decide wehther to sign or not. Those
> information vary from key to key and thus it can't be scripted.
In our environment the key is generated and immediately imported
into another keyring and signed. There is no need to verify the identity
of the key, etc. So it would be very useful for us to be able to sign
What objection is there to batch key deletion?
> We are working on a GPGME interface to do ease it up. You may have
> noticed problems with GPA when you don't use a standard key or use gpg
> 1.0.7. This is due to a too simple approach to handle these
OK, but from what little I know of GPGME right now, it seems to be a
powerful and complex API to using GPG. I don't need that, and it's not
helpful for shell scripts. I just need to be able to automate the commands
which I can give from the command line anyway.
> Sorry, That happens from time to time. There is also the issue that
> we need legal papers to include non-trivial patches.
I am about to send in my papers to the FSF for some work I've done on Tar,
but in any case I think these patches will be small enough that they
shouldn't pose a legal problem for you. But I leave that to your
___ __ _
/ __// / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson -- UNIX Firewall Lead Developer |
/ (_ / ,\/ _/ /_ \ | NetServers.co.uk http://www.netservers.co.uk |
\ _//_/_/_//_/___/ | 21 Signet Court, Cambridge, UK. 01223 576516 |
More information about the Gnupg-devel