dirk.traulsen at lypso.de
Wed Oct 26 10:24:38 CEST 2005
Am 11 Sep 2005 um 23:01 hat David Shaw geschrieben:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 09:59:53AM -0500, John Clizbe wrote:
> > David Shaw wrote:
> > > There is perhaps an argument to be made for a
> > > "super clean" that does clean and also removes any
> > > signature where the signing key is
> > > not present (in fact, an early version of clean did that),
> > > but that's a different thing than clean.
> > Perhaps --scrub ? --sanitize ? --disinfect ?
> I rather like "minimize", but this isn't really a minimal key
> (as it has signatures other than selfsigs).
I gave the naming some thought. Witty and funny names aside, I think
there are so many commands and options, that it would be better to
expand the name and not take a new one.
I suggest following solution: a new option 'clean [total]'.
This could be the new part in the man-page:
clean Cleans keys by removing unusable pieces. This com-
mand can be used to keep keys neat and clean, and
it has no effect aside from that.
sigs Remove any signatures that are not usable
by the trust calculations. For example,
this removes any signature that does not
validate. It also removes any signature
that is superceded by a later signature,
or signatures that were revoked.
uids Compact (by removing all signatures
except the selfsig) any user ID that is
no longer usable (e.g. revoked, or
total Remove like above any unusable signature
and UID, but also remove any signature
for which the signing key is not present.
If invoked with no arguments, both `sigs' and `uids' are
If invoked without `total', only signatures for which the
signing key is present can be evaluted.
What do you think about that, David?
I would really appreciate such a function and I'm sure, that I'm not
the only one. Please consider to implement it.
As I cannot do it myself, maybe I can help with this proposal.
More information about the Gnupg-users