gpg or gpgme?
jrevusky at telefonica.net
Thu Nov 27 13:19:04 CET 2003
Werner Koch wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:51:59 +0100, Jonathan Revusky said:
>>automatically support those back-ends. But I don't think this is so
>>important for us. Are there other aspects of this that I'm missing?
> Eventually gpg will support a server mode like gpgsm now does. This
> reduced the overhead of the fork/exec and also allows to better check
> the validity of the recipients.
That is quite interesting, but you say above that gpg will support a
server mode, so we would be able to take advantage of that (when it
exists) without using gpgme, right?
More information about the Gnupg-devel