MESSAGE
| DATE | 2001-10-08 |
| FROM | Billy
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [hangout] Re: your mail
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 01:23:26PM -0400, Joe Ercole wrote:
> From: Joe Ercole
> To: Billy
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Subject: Re: your mail
> Reply-To:
> In-Reply-To: <20011008111809.B728-at-dadadada.net>
>
> gpg 1.0.6 & mutt is still giving me headaches, very odd. I'll get it
> worked out, though.
>
> mutt spits out something about a missing `--options` file, though I know
> the file is there, and works well enough for verifying, encrypting, etc..
> Apart from mutt
This procmail helps me get normal PGP-signed messages to trigger Mutt's
built-in facilities on incoming mail.
:0
* !^Content-Type: message/
* !^Content-Type: multipart/
* !^Content-Type: application/pgp
{
:0 fBw
* ^-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
* ^-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=encrypt"
:0 fBw
* ^-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
* ^-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
* ^-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=sign"
}
Mutt depends on a sensible but unfortunately uncommon convention of using MIME
to identify PGP messages as "Content-Type: application/pgp". If I send
messages in this format, Outlook Users receive the body my message as an
'attachment'. Grrrr... So I don't use the built-in Mutt PGP features
unless I'm sending to someone who also uses Mutt. I sign and encrypt
using a vi macro in .vimrc.
"
" PGP sign the whole buffer.
"
map :%!gpg --clearsign
I don't have a very good solution to encrypting...
I do this from vi:
:%!gpg -sear jercole-at-speakeasy.org
- --
"The funk, the whole funk, and nothing but the funk."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE7wexp+2VvpwIZdF0RAuHkAJ9KxSqqFQfHlOTLgbZMQwYLBxjxEACeJkM1
y0sn43kRrDHm3o/8//U6wfA=
=1P9m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
____________________________
New Yorker Linux Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
|
|
