We have fixed it but the commit also states:

I agree because the original purpose from the 90ies to enable the use of signed patch files in the Linux kernel community was never actually used and GnuPG stopped the distribution of patches from version to version many years ago. Thus I agree we should hide this option behind a compatibility flag.

Will be in 2.5.14 but I am not yet sure whether or when we put support into gpgme

There will be a new "pfc" record to emit the used preferences after a "uid" record. --list-options show-pref must be given.

For argparse we use /etc as a default but applications may use gpgrt_set_confdir to set a different one. Howeever if we already have a new get_sysconfdir function, it is easy and useful to change the default on Unix.

In GnuPG we use CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA and append "\GNU\etc\gnupg". If this can't be found we use the rootdir, that is he installation directory of the binary or one up if installed below a bin directory. The reason for using GNU and not POSIX or Unix is merely to avoid name clashes with other software ported to Windows. There was no real standard for this on Windows.

We already did this for Libgcrypt 1.8 but take care that an installer includig Libgcrypt should run something like

The question is who shall correct the wrong encoding of notation data (assuming it is flagged as human readable). Escaping is a solution but needs a lot of extra bytes.

It is not an ADSK issue. The problem is that the new subkey has not been entered into the fingerprint table and can thus not be found.

I think at line 82 we should use xtrymalloc as always in gpg-agent. xtrymalloc expands to gcry_malloc.

Workaround is to use --with-keygrip and delete both <keygrip>.key files. Problem here is that one part may be on a smartcard or one part might be shared (although not allowed) with other keys.

But you are able to do this w/o gpgol being active?

gpgconf does not know about the global config files. Nor does it known about things like gpg.conf-2 etc.

I'd sad we keep it as it is now (unless we see a regression). The real and only correct solution is the use of a daemon to serialize access.

That might be related to T2196 which has been hopefully fixed in 2.2.50 and also in the next 2.6. Closing this task.

That might be related to T2196 which has been hopefully fixed in 2.2.50 and also in the next 2.6. Closing this task.

I applied it to the 2.4 branch but please do not continue to translate for 2.4. 2.6 (master) is the new target.

Implemented but not tested at all.