Fingerprints and Key-IDs - Was: [PATCH] avoid publishing the GnuPG version by default
wk at gnupg.org
Sat Aug 6 10:39:34 CEST 2016
On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 21:39, ilf at zeromail.org said:
> IMHO we need *not* be respectful to third-party tools using GnuPG in a
> way that it explicitly warns against, exactly because it might break.
That's the theory.
>> FWIW, I recently learned that there widely used tools which parse
>> --list-packets. An option I always considered a debug interface.
> Which ones? Let's contact the maintainers to get them fixed.
See debian bug 831500.
However this is not the point. Although we can look at Debian's use of
gpg we can't do soo for the majority of applications - they are simply
not public and people usually don't tell about it.
> Funny, when I append a comment after "default-key" in gpg.conf, GnuPG
> 2.1 fails for me:
> | % grep ^default-key .gnupg/gpg.conf
> | default-key 0xCBB15A68EF3AC804875D5C4E153FE398821C8394 # ilf
That is not a common comment pattern. The common pattern is to ignore
empty lines and lines with a '#' as first non white space character. A
'#' somewhere on the line requires a more explicit grammar to consider
it has a "ignore the rest of the line".
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
/* Join us at OpenPGP.conf <https://openpgp-conf.org> */
More information about the Gnupg-devel