I removed this specialized error message. Thanks for reporting.

Users keep showing up in our support, confused by this inconsistency. This problem continues in 2020. What's holding this back?

Paul Wouters writes to me:

One of the things that dirmngr has going for it is that it tracks the current network state, and it would be nice to be able to reuse that state across sessions. If an ephemeral keyring can't use a shared dirmngr, there are fewer arguments for having dirmngr in the first place, and people might be more justified in replacing it with things like https://gitlab.com/anarcat/scripts/blob/master/openpgp-key-get

I don't anymore think this is a high priority request. BTW, A more real problem than several dirmngr instances is multi-user access to smartcards.

Thanks.

Sure, but lets use that ticket for this. if you have another topic, feel free to open another ticket.

Is a PR to add it to the website welcome? Not sure that I'll get around to it, but in case someone else is interested - I linked here from those stackoverflow pages.

It is in the tarball:

doc/DETAILS

and for example Debian installs it as /usr/share/doc/gnupg/DETAILS.gz. Check out the first section "Format of the colon listings". Or use GPGME which provides C, C++, Python and JSON bindings. Sorry, it never made it to the website.

@werner where is this now documented? I can't find it.

First of all I find PIN a very bad term. "Personal Identification Number" for example for my Gnuk token is confusing. I use a string there,... So let us use PIN only where it really has to be a number. Otherwise it is a Password.

Despite that I created this task, I am still not not convinced that removing the term passphrase is a good idea. If we do this in gnupg we would need to change all strings to make it clear that the passphrase is used to protect one's own key and has nothing to do with encryption etc. In fact the term PIN would be better because it is common knowledge that you use a PIN to get access to something you own. There would be less confusion on the purpose of the passphrase. Sure PIN is usually considered to be a number. However my bank allows a string to be used as, what they call, PIN.

There has been some progress here. At least we no longer use "passphrase" in new code. We still have not yet replaced all old occurances.

Fixed. Thanks.

T4298: 'make check' with uninstalled library, which is building now (even if rpath doesn't work well) handles related issue, which was fixed for libgcrypt-1.9. Since this issue is for other libraries (libgpg-error, specifically), we could do something similar, but, it may be detecting LD_LIBRARY_PATH to fail with "Please remove LD_LIBRARY_PATH".

It seems it's Ubuntu specific: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/imagemagick/+bug/1796563

I think that all that we can do is to improve documentation.

yes. that's why i wrote it in '['-brackets.
but usually, in info-documents a synopsis is written about it.
I think that it's not self-evident, that "you can either give a file or let the tool read from stdin or output to stdout" and therefore should be written explicitly.

Could you say, on which platforms exactly it should work?

no-grab does only work on certain platforms. Thus this is no bug.

"partially" means it doesn't allow to input elsewhere, but in case of focus loose input will go nowhere

At least it MUST NOT grub input with no-grab option. But it doesn't allow to input elsewhere in any case.

We know that. And pinentry-gtk does like that.

It's possibe to do via gtk3 directly:
https://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/stable/gtk3-General.html#gtk-device-grab-add

Yes. It's up to GCR library in GNOME.

@werner Given you filed it as low priority and documentation - could you give feedback on whether that is expected behaviour or not?

The “this” is used so that we don't have too many strings to translate.
I added a call to print_further_info which will in --verbose mode explain it.

Will be in 2.2.10

I need to know which of the processes segv: mkdefsinc, cat or the subshell. And a backtrace would also be very helpful.

We didn't found the time to organize it. There will be a OpenPGP summit this fall organized by Patrick, though

I wonder if there's potential for engaging users remotely? Also, in addition to a workshop, maybe a user interface study of how users learn and interact with the tool? I feel like doing that with people who are relatively light/new users of gpg (like me, currently struggling as I wade thru a mix of docs, some of it outdated) could be beneficial. See also: https://arxiv.org/abs/1510.08555

Hint from @gniibe: gpg --with-colons --list-config curve is a workaround.
So it still should be documented and made accessible from a non-esoteric, non-internal way. ;)

In T3751#110422, @cipherpunks wrote:

What's in daily use for 15 yrs? GPGME? I thought GPGME was new,

Thanks for the report. The broken sentence came from an unterminated hyperlink. I fixed the spelling and the link.

I changed the wording to suggest the use of proper transport security.

What's in daily use for 15 yrs? GPGME? I thought GPGME was new, but in any case it's broken in the cases mentioned in that thread.

Originally dirmngr was designed to be a system service for the reason that CRLs are not user specific. However, the majority of systems today are used by a single user and thus we dropped that feature when integrating dirmngr into gnupg.

Come on, it is in daily use for 15 years. MUA which can't handle MIME at all but PGP are still able to decrypt PGP/MIME. That is why ME specified PGP/MIME this way.

Thanks for noticing. I've changed it and clarified that GpgOL is for Windows only and not for the Outlook Web App / Android or Mac.

Ah well, no rules without exception.