From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/65087 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Daiki Ueno" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: NotDashEscaped, what? Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 22:17:13 +0900 Message-ID: <54a15d860708270617n7c9f5aa5w41f4404f6710dac8@mail.gmail.com> References: <87r6lpcn4l.fsf@cadilhac.name> <54a15d860708270349x29f0fb36g981f322a544db777@mail.gmail.com> <87fy25ci7q.fsf@cadilhac.name> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1188221000 27067 80.91.229.12 (27 Aug 2007 13:23:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:23:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl_Cadilhac?=" Original-X-From: ding-owner+M13595@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Aug 27 15:23:15 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IPeYl-0001HV-6a for ding-account@gmane.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:23:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IPeXo-0000RN-Mh; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:22:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IPeT5-0000Pd-Eo for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:17:23 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IPeT2-0003lA-B2 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:17:23 -0500 Original-Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.183]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1IPeSx-0008O3-00 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:17:15 +0200 Original-Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id f31so1161391pyh for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 06:17:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=WLcM6g3meNI0W5N3EB+UcrTd00LmWEGgMPLmha2GsY+ivZS+xylNQAMJfosog2DeLJS+oOq9okF+gTcx0M6G8uI2kGCDlKra3ZXDdGqkfJpH369QHEA8fT1XX7djmEXIOmlS4dIradWRD6zdpaueykrwOHyW8PRPgIwj00tFpEc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=rRgmTdkLAIttUXRKydH6NDQ5uyiK2rUkezT7TgBrof7GcPzrOv5So8mp4jxbaNa4/1FF5MuGu+i8w7rZV4hFfwkPL/I7/s7/hq6WBjU91opHFYCMdNj1mRSjq70dlMUAtcdqGPSp/h5jZTVpo+dJjPZBYZjVUA1PjD6uN5SgLJY= Original-Received: by 10.35.49.1 with SMTP id b1mr7514914pyk.1188220633569; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 06:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.35.128.7 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Aug 2007 06:17:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87fy25ci7q.fsf@cadilhac.name> Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: 86e4f452bec229f6 X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:65087 Archived-At: Hi, 2007/8/27, Micha=EBl Cadilhac : > "Daiki Ueno" writes: > Hi! Is it on purpose that you removed the ding ML? No, I just sent it via gmail which I'm not familiar with. > > 2007/8/27, Micha=EBl Cadilhac : > >> I see more and more =AB NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this > >> message =BB in the shown text of mails. I think it may be a little bu= g. > >> > >> The messages read as follow: > >> > >> =3D2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message > >> > > [...] > >> =3D2D----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >> > >> > >> Maybe we should discard in Gnus such a sub-header, I think what's here > >> means that it could b= e > >> discarded safely. > >> > >> Any strong or weak opinion? > > > > IMO, decoding dash-escaped text is a task of GnuPG (libraries), not of = Gnus. > > Well, I really don't know what I'm talking about, but the point is that > I don't want to see this NotDashEscaped. It's quite disturbing. So, > maybe GnuPG is the culprit... Normally GnuPG does not insert a NotDashEscaped header. I guess that the sender (Steve Youngs) has a line "not-dash-escaped" in his ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf. > However, I wasn't talking about decoding dash-escaped text, but more > remove a sub-header (NotDashEscaped) together with its contents. Yes, I know that. However, if NotDashEscaped is removed, we should also treat the original text as *not* dash-escaped. Otherwise, the contents you will see is not what signed in the clearsigned message. I personally think this is not a big problem though. > > For example, the following code returns the original text which is > > properly decoded by GnuPG, regardless of the "clearsigned message" is > > dash-escaped or not. > > > > (epg-verify-signature (epg-make-context) "clearsigned message") > > I don't understand what point you want to make, sorry. I was saying that it is straightforward to make use of GnuPG's output rather than to decode/reformat dash-escaped text by Gnus itself. Regards, --=20 Daiki Ueno