-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 11:08:34PM -0700, der.hans wrote: > Am 12. Sep, 2000 schwäzte Nathan Saper so: > > > Some mailers don't handle PGP/MIME very well. For example, with Pine, you > > have to export the mail to a file, then run PGP manually on it. Maybe I'm > > missing something... > > I thought you could run the message through a pipe as long as it's ascii > armored. > Yeah, but it screws up most of the standard viewing filters for PGP under Pine, such as pgp4pine and pgpenvelope. > qrovna xvpxf nff > > Pipe this message through a rot13 filter, tr a-z n-za-m, to get back to > the orig. Just noticed that pine takes you to a viewer for that, so > replying sucks :(. You can forward the piped text, but can't reply to > it. Pretty lame. Lame is right. > > Oh well, I'm planning on figuring out how to get mutt to work like I want > it to anyway... Mutt is definitely a more powerful mailer than Pine. It just does things in ways that I'm not used to. > > > Mutt only scans the headers of mails to see if they're PGP > > signed/encrypted. This is a PGP/MIME thing, I think. Procmail just adds > > that header to PGP messages that don't already have it. > > I use procmail anyhow. Yeah, procmail's cool. I don't mind using procmail, I just mind being FORCED to use procmail in order to have mutt pick out standard PGP mails. It just seems like something that mutt should be able to do itself... > > > Don't ask me why mutt is set up that way... > > It has many peculiararities. Quite true. I understand the benefits of PGP/MIME (such as being able to encrypt non-ASCII data), but it still gets annoying for everyday use. - -- Nathan Saper natedog@well.com (PGP OK) Fingerprint (0x9AD0F382): 743D FE2C 7F2E 7CAE 4A5F 0B19 D855 B205 9AD0 F382 Fidonet: 1:114/59.10 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5wBc22FWyBZrQ84IRAvFmAKCVY1Yp3lEZI1KhX4pcEpJuOzEZoQCdF2n5 Dmnt9gk7VQ73nQVX5/I9azU= =lUlC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----