D121: 279_gpgme-parms-doc.patch

Ah right. Apologies for my ignorance.

In card edit it is:

Changed in all branches (svn rev 5256).
The prompts are now:

Just for completeness doing a

GPG_TTY=$(tty)
export GPG_TTY

There is further a grammar:

Taking a look at the code, it would require to adjust

Anyways, I can provide a gpgme trace at level 9 if you consider it necessary.

Hello Werner.

Yep,
already fixed everything on my boxes.

Fixed in SVN 5253. Thanks.

Please be patient until we find time to join a russian language class.

Frankly, I can only guess what you are doing. Is that a seahorse action to add
another user id or an existing key? A backtrace does not help at all here.

I am sorry about this. Please read
http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2010-January/038045.html

That's not a GnuPG problem but rather Microsoft's backup funcitionality.

D120: 277_gnupg1.texi.diff

Patch attached.

May I ask for the status? Seems, there were no objections.

Agreed.

Good catch. Tanks.

http://cvs.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/trunk/doc/dirmngr.texi?rev=334&root=Dirmngr&view=markup
@node Dirmngr Protocol
still misses LOADCRL and others as far as I can see.

I am sorry but this is really misfeature rather than a feature. So you basically
say, that if caller of libgcrypt does not want to having it mess with uids and
capabilities it has to copy over about 600 lines from the secmem.c just to
delete the few calls?

This is not a bug but a feature. If an application does not want this behaviour
it needs to register its own allocation handler.

Thanks for the excellent description.

See for example here:
http://code.google.com/p/cryptsetup/issues/detail?id=47

I tracked it down with GPG (hadn't used that in 10 years).

D119: 275_gnupg-2.0.14-tests-s2kcount.patch

Marcus, not yet so far. I would appreciate a test on your end, as I might not
get to the issue for a while. There should be enough information to reproduce
the issue.

That is a long list of comments with unclear error sepcification. I can't find
anything which explains why this is an nuPG problem. I'd appreciate if you can
summarize the problems and possible sulutions from theat forum right here in the
BTS. Thanks.

To tarck this down I would also need the key. Can you create such a broken
message using one of the example keys (e.g. alfa@example.net)? IF so, feel free
to send it to me directly wk@gnupg.org - if the data is kind of sensitive, feeel
free to encrypt. Due to anti-spam meastures it is best to send a gzipped
tarball or any other gzipped data; or send me an URL.

You want see those '-' because gpg detects them after removing the ascii armor
(base 64 encoding). The ----END line is part of the ascii armor and thus not
relevant for gpg. You may strip the ascii armor yourself by using "gpg --dearmor".

Hi Bernhard,

There is GpgOL 1.0.1 coming with Gpg4win 2.0.1. Can you give that a try?
Please also state the precise version of Windows and Outlook you are using.

What is the content of tests/openpgp/conventional.test.log ?

Well, it shows that the problem is not in gpgex but in Kleopatra.