Injecting Status-fd output

[Nicholas Cole]

On 3/8/07, Werner Koch <wk at gnupg.org> wrote:
> On Thu,  8 Mar 2007 09:50, nicholas.cole at gmail.com said:
>
> > Usually, I read the --status-fd output and the statard output
> > seperately, but obviously this has its own problems.
>
> gpg should make sure that this is syncronized.

[snip]

Interesting.  I hadn't realised this.  I've been using the popen2
module in python, which seems to break this, even if I disable
buffering.  I can't seem to find a way of calling gpg that would let
me take advantage of whatever it is trying to do.

[snip]


> This is an old problem [injected status lines] and something we can't easily fix.  Detecting
> this marker in the plaintext is of course possible but what shall we
> do about it?  We would need to modify the message and thus break a lot
> of applications.  It might we possible to do this for the case of
> status-fd and output writing to stdout only.

I guess that the only way to fix it without breaking existing apps
would be to add an option like:

--prefix-plaintext-lines

and put [GNUPG PLAINTEXT] at the front of each.

Or am I missing something obvious?

Best,

N.