106d (was: Re: timestamp (0x40) signatures?)

[David Shaw]

On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 07:57:51PM +0200, disastry@saiknes.lv wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
> 
> Werner Koch wk@gnupg.org wrote:
> > BTW, I have released 1.0.6d but not written an announcement yet.
> >   Werner
> 
> doc/gpg.info (and other doc/* files)
> 
> - --pgp2
> [...]
>      This option implies `--rfc1991 -no-openpgp -no-force-v4-certs
>      --no-comment -escape-from -no-force-v3-sigs -cipher-algo IDEA
>      --digest-algo MD5 -compress-algo 1'
> 
> shuld be double dashes here

That's interesting.  The gpg.info file is actually missing
double-dashes in quite a few places.

The master gpg.sgml has it right, and the gpg.1 man page file
(generated from gpg.sgml) also has it right.  The gpg.info file is
generated from gpg.texi which is generated from gpg.sgml, but it has
it wrong.  Maybe something in the docbook-to-texinfo stuff?

David
-- 
   David Shaw  |  dshaw@jabberwocky.com  |  WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
      We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson