Just by going through the standard "new key wizard".

Can you give me a reproducer on Linux. I am not able to reproduce it. What versions of gnupg and gpgme are you using (see gpa's about)

I'll deploy one on AWS somewhere briefly once I've replaced a certain external keyboard, there will almost certainly be an existing image of some Linux distro in the AWS marketplace and I'd be very surprised if it took more than an hour or two of compute time to confirm.

I am not sure what text you reference. Can you please explain?

ImageMagick version with that regression?

I decided not to backport UIF things.
Other fixes (KDF and memory leak) were done.
If this decision will be re-evaluated, remember the backport of the commit rG05d163aebc04: scd: Make "learn" report about KDF data object. doesn't have UIF change.

Perhaps, the changes for UIF (user interaction flag) is not needed to be backported now.
Because the feature is not yet used by any OpenPGP card implementation.
I am testing with Gnuk, but it's still experimental even for Gnuk.

That is good.

One more semantic question about how folks think Context.decrypt(verify=True) should work: if the decrypted thing has no signature at all, should the function succeed without throwing an exception? it currently does, but the returned verify_result has its signatures member set to the empty list.

Just a heads up to everyone, Fedora is moving forward with this change for Fedora 30 (currently rawhide). https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1656282 is the bug tracking it.

Ooh, nice catch @dkg, I just stepped through each of your changes and it all looks good. I'll tweak the relevant sections of the HOWTO dealing with this in the next few days (I need to replace a keyboard here before properly diving back in) and then close this case once done.

❤

since @aheinecke merged my changes, i think this bug is now resolved. I'll let @BenM close it though :)

@aheinecke thanks for the merge of my other branch! sadly, that branch does *not* address this issue yet. It doesn't even test for it. :( I can work on trying to fix it (and test it) if there's a consensus that we want this particular change in behavior.

I apologize for the wrong report.
Files to be encrypted should be at the end of the command.
It's my mistake.

Sounds good! I give it to me for testing / documenting this.

Is this fixed now?

Ben is not even subscribed to this issue.
With the volatility of gpgme-python I think that this can easily be merged. I did a quick review and it looked good to me.

Thanks! Applied.

Needs to be merged. (Note that Phabricator does not show the branch in the tooltip for commit ids.)

note that the branch also updates the test suite to make sure the verify=False case is tested.

I've just pushed a branch dkg/fix-T4271 , currently at ac8d7238dbf165950c9844e5cb41da8eb4d37bc0 that resolves this problem.

With master we can now do:

Cool and yes, that could also be an option. I was explicitly told by KDE-Windows that this would work for them, too. The problem for me is that I feel comfortable to add a CMake Buildsystem for the Cpp and Qt bindings (maybe Python?). It would be very simple for me, I would not extend it to GPGME core, at least not at first. I could do that on GNU/Linux without having to test an MSVC build.
It will be more effort for me to make autotools work nicely with MSVC. I would have to test that etc.

Just to stress it; I am in favor of allowing builds using other compilers. We allow this on Unix and so we should allow this on Windows as well. We should remember to use different DLL names to make it explicit that a certain DLL is targetting a specific ABI.

Another build systems does not solve your problem. If you want to support another toolchain, that is fine. But it can as well be done with the current build system. it is a matter of adding a new platform triplet to make sure we are not linking against different libc versions. In fact we can build all our code on a wide range of platforms with very different compilers, so supporting MSVC won't be a problem. Mixing them is a bad idea as can be shown by the usual cross-runtime malloc/free problems.

Further discussion revealed that the main problem is QtWebengine, which is a requirement of KMail and basically a fully fledged web browser with millions of lines of code. QtWebengine is only supported for MSVC on Windows and a MinGW port is not feasible, so just compiling KMail with MinGW all the way through like I did in the past is no longer an option. :-(

I give this high priority. This blocks for years that the KDE-Windows initiative provides a way to install the very good crypto MUA KMail on windows. They rely on MSVC (you can say that this is bad, but it is a fact of life). As a former member of that community I am a bit ashamed that I made it harder / impossible for them to build KMail with MSVC because I've moved it to GPGME proper.

I think that is something I want to grapple with next year. The maintainer of KDE 4 windows noted that they currently rely on the patches from:

It might also be noted there in the installation instructions that it might be better not to run the installer from the download folder. (internal tracker issue45)