Actually we considerto remove this feature from the GUI because with the global config we have a more versatile feature now.
- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Advanced Search
May 27 2021
Apr 4 2021
Mar 14 2021
Mar 9 2021
Feb 10 2021
Won't be done because the expectations of users are different on whether they use ssh-agent or gpg-agent. And it breaks scripts
Feb 9 2021
Done. FWIW. in 2.3 symcryptrun will be removed entirely.
Jan 29 2021
See also https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/webkey-directory/-/issues/3 which is the same issue.
Jan 26 2021
Sorry, we won't apply such changes. A couple of years we did this and all we earned were a few extra bugs aqnd useless diffs. Further many of those changes are in files which will be updated from upstream time to time and your chnages would be lost.
OK, I only edited documents and notes, no code changes.
Thanks. However, we need to go over the list one by one to decide this. For example
"http://gnupg.org/.well-known/openpgpkey/hu/12345678" is actually expected to return a 404 and test code may very well use http:
Jan 19 2021
Jan 15 2021
This ambiguity appears to be the cause of a recent epic (and to me, largely incomprehensible) thread on gnupg-users. It would be great to have the WKD guidance about fallback strategy be much more explicit. Any room for ambiguity here leads to different outcomes from different WKD clients, and quite a bit of confused discussion by their users.
Dec 23 2020
In T5189#140595, @gniibe wrote:Please note that many error messages are defined in: https://dev.gnupg.org/source/libgpg-error/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
and https://dev.gnupg.org/source/gnupg/browse/master/po/zh_CN.poSorry, in case you already know that.
May I ask that how to get a new complete clean po file.
I'm not familiar with gettext.
The old one is confusing, and I think maybe I should completely clean the messy.
Really a big project.
Frankly, I more or less forgot about these help files. The German version for sure needs an update as weel.
In T5189#140595, @gniibe wrote:Please note that many error messages are defined in: https://dev.gnupg.org/source/libgpg-error/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
and https://dev.gnupg.org/source/gnupg/browse/master/po/zh_CN.poSorry, in case you already know that.
In T5189#140594, @gniibe wrote:For D515, I will also apply it to master.
Before that, I'd like to confirm an editorial change of mine:
- Remove an extra space before new line (two places)
Please and thanks, I imitated the English edition format :-)
- Remove a comment for use case of the file
- If needed, we could have support of another locale(s) with Chinese language: zh_HK, zh_SG, etc.
- It is not us, but it's users who decide which locale is better for them
- E.g., my friend in Düsseldorf uses ja_JP locale
- So, it's technically better not to address restriction in a translation
for that, I think you best keep that.
Use a locale to distinguish Chinese users always cause problems.
There isn't a big difference between the written language. And small region always lack translations.
Singapore's users who use simplified Chinese always use zh_CN if there is no a specific zh_SG.
And the traditional Chinese users from HK SAR and MC SAR sometimes use the translation for Taiwan Province.
So when translate it, the tip remiand you must consider all the users from anywhere.
Please note that many error messages are defined in: https://dev.gnupg.org/source/libgpg-error/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
and https://dev.gnupg.org/source/gnupg/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
For D515, I will also apply it to master.
Applied D514 to master, with an editorial change (removing extra space before newline).
Dec 21 2020
also update doc/help.zh_TW.txt by the way
D515: update gnupg doc/help.zh_TW.txt
upload the v2 patch and create a revision
D514: update gnupg doc/help.zh_CN.txt
waiting for review
:-)
Please not that you can use this interface: https://dev.gnupg.org/differential/
I think that it is better when you update your patch. You can just refer a patch from this task by:
In T5189#140362, @gniibe wrote:Do you call gpg-agent as 'Gpg 代理'? IIUC, it is better keep it as is (gpg-agent), because it is the name of the program.
If translated, 'keygrip' should be different word to 'fingerprint', because 'fingerprint' is used as a technical term of OpenPGP.
Do you call gpg-agent as 'Gpg 代理'? IIUC, it is better keep it as is (gpg-agent), because it is the name of the program.
Dec 20 2020
Nov 23 2020
Thanks.
Sep 16 2020
Sep 15 2020
Aug 28 2020
Aug 21 2020
Read through it, thanks for the updated description!
Aug 20 2020
Thanks. Fixed for 2.2.22
Jul 16 2020
No info received
Jun 3 2020
Done.
May 28 2020
May 18 2020
Okay, makes sense.
No, it is widely understood as a means for reproducible builds and specified at: https://reproducible-builds.org/docs/source-date-epoch/
SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is NixOS specific?
May 17 2020
Well, I had simply accepted that the rule for defsincdate is always triggered. I looked a bit more into it, and the cause for triggering is that Nixpkgs patches dirmngr.texi, hence defsincdate is cleared by the rule above and the fallback behaviour is triggered.
But this also means my suggested patch wouldn't help here as the modification date of dirmngr.texi would be picked up.
Looking at the rules I do not understand why we have a problem here, the rule
I think an option to ignore certain files is a better way to do this. I'll give it a try.
May 8 2020
Cool. Falls du einen Korrekturleser für die neue Fassung brauchst, sag gerne Bescheid. Ich hab da Erfahrung …
erstmal vielen dank für das Feedback. Ich habe momentan als Aufgabe ein neues Benutzerhandbuch auf Basis des Kompendiums zu erstellen und werde da die Hinweise auch mit Aufnehmen. Technisch ist sowohl der Inhalt als auch die Art wie das Handbuch erzeugt wird nicht mehr aktuell, wir brauchen da dringend etwas neues das wir auch online stellen können.
Sollte noch in diesem Jahr passieren.
Thanks for the patch, applied!
You are correct the NEWS file states that this was added in 1.9.0
Apr 25 2020
Apr 21 2020
Apr 9 2020
Mar 24 2020
@sarman: Your question is actually a support question and not a bug report. Please read the documentation, use the public help channels (so that other can also learn from the issue), or get in touch with a commercial support provider.
I think that what you want is adding --batch option. In the gpg manual, we have:
--passphrase-file file Read the passphrase from file file. Only the first line will be read from file file. This can only be used if only one passphrase is supplied. Obviously, a passphrase stored in a file is of questionable security if other users can read this file. Don't use this option if you can avoid it.
Hello Team,
For operations which require private key, it is needed to unlock private key.
Mar 19 2020
Dec 6 2019
Dec 5 2019
Sep 30 2019
Sep 2 2019
Aug 30 2019
Thanks. Fixed in stanble and master.
Aug 29 2019
Aug 23 2019
This was already fixed with version 2.2.5.
Aug 21 2019
This was also raised for (hopefully) wider discussion on the IETF mailing list.
Aug 20 2019
Aug 12 2019
I am in charge of editing the current OpenPGP draft, so I will for sure keep an eye on that issue. If would appreciate if you can post your report also to openpgp at ietf org.
Aug 2 2019
Jul 17 2019
Jul 16 2019
Thanks, fixed in master.
Jul 15 2019
Jul 14 2019
Jul 12 2019
I disabled the dependency rules for the figures (it's only enabled for maintainers).
Jul 5 2019
Jul 4 2019
Given the recent problems with the keyservers, I expect that the keyserver feature will go away anyway and thus I do not think we will put any more effort into this. Thus I re-tag this as gpg 2.3.
Jul 3 2019
Jun 18 2019
If we only need it for backward compatibility, then the configuration in gpg.conf should *not* be overriding the preferred, forward-looking form of the configuration (in dirmngr.conf). If it is low priority to fix this, then there will be a generation of GnuPG users and toolchains which deliberately configure the value in gpg.conf instead of dirmngr.conf because they'll know that's the more robust way to do it.
Jun 8 2019
We need --keyserver in gpg for just one reason: backward compatibility.
thanks for fixing that error message, @werner. As @Valodim points out in discusson about hagrid, a gpg.conf keyserver option (deprecated according to the documentation) overrides the dirmngr.conf keyserver option (not deprecated according to the documentation.
Jun 4 2019
I see the regression of gpgconf. I wonder if it's better to fix gpgconf side, too.
I see a regression with your fix. This option is even controllable with gpgconf at the basic level. It would be better to make it a dummy option.
I meant, 'card-timeout' was not intended for controlling caching PIN on card. It was for "DISCONNECT" command support.
I'm going to remove questionable documentation.
Closing.