"New" packet headers and gpg

[Stephen Paul Weber]

Somebody claiming to be David Shaw wrote:
>On Jan 4, 2013, at 9:39 AM, Stephen Paul Weber <singpolyma at singpolyma.net> wrote:
>> Somebody claiming to be David Shaw wrote:
>>> On Jan 3, 2013, at 9:53 PM, Stephen Paul Weber <singpolyma at singpolyma.net> wrote:
>>>> tell gpg or gpg2 to produce "new" packet length headers for output?
>>> No.
>> I was hoping that with all the "advanced mode, you probably don't care 
>> about this" features, there would be one for this.
>
>You could patch the code (look in build-packet.c) fairly easily if you need 
>this.  Out of curiosity, why do you want to use only new packet headers?

I might do that if I get further along.  I want to be able to have partial 
OpenPGP implementations that only bother with new-style headers.  Such 
implementations' ouput can be read by gpg, but there's currently no way to 
convince gpg to talk to them :)

My own implementations currently do support both kinds of headers, so it's 
not a pressing need.

-- 
Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma
See <http://singpolyma.net> for how I prefer to be contacted
edition right joseph
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20130104/c00560dd/attachment.pgp>