I had wrong interpretation about symmetric cipher algorithm identifier in the draft. It specifies symmetric cipher for the following Symmetrically Encrypted Data Packet (I was wrongly interpret as if it were specifying algo for AES keywrap).

@werner I- think you were a bit quick on the trigger to shut this down.
I had rebooted the machine in between attempts. So your analysis is actually not correct.
Basically you have an issue that something in gpg is using something in a locale that is not installed. I pretty much proved that.
Anywho, I'll leave it to you to work out if you want to bother investigating it further.

"Today" was already removed together with other changes for T6621: Kleopatra: Remove "in n days/weeks/months/years" input from Change Validity Period dialog.

I just want to point out that we have explicitly decided to remove confronting the user with five different "What next" options in the certificate creation workflow. One reason is that the choice overwhelms the users because some think they need to do everything. Another reason is that many options were completely wrong for some of our customers. Such workflows are much better documented in company-specific SOPs (standard operation procedures).

Fixed. This improves the first impression when users use the first smart card with Kleopatra.

Also noticed this and created an upstream report as well: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=485308

I merged the change by Werner to get the value from frontend.

Looks good. Remember to add ChangeLog-style entries for all affected files to the commit log message.

Yellow indicates a warning. In the old days we used yellow in too many cases and people barely got a green. This raised more user questioned than it was helpful. There is also a problem with accessibility if we overload colors too much.

This was done by Tobias.

For VSD I somewhat agree since this is the difference between a VD Compliant signature. For the community edition though level 2 is usually enough and should also be indicated as trustworthy. So I am currently in two minds about this.

In the current code, just for testing against the test vector in m https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc-02, there are specific value in the key combiner KDF.
Namely, the value 105 for fixedInfo is defined in the draft (and it will be changed).

Applied to master. If no problem will be found, I'll apply to 2.4 branch too.
Let's see.