Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Bug#381911: gnupg: Problem uploading armored key with "KEY xxxx"... delimiter

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Norbert Tretkowski

unread,
Aug 7, 2006, 3:50:10 PM8/7/06
to
Package: gnupg
Version: 1.4.1-1.sarge5
Severity: important

GnuPG in dapper fails to send a key to the keyserver when it contains
a line with '^KEY'.

This problem is documented here:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gnupg/users/37546

Patch is available here:
http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-commits/2006-July/006580.html

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.16-2-k7
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=de_DE (charmap=ISO-8859-1)

Versions of packages gnupg depends on:
ii libbz2-1.0 1.0.2-7 high-quality block-sorting file co
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge3 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libldap2 2.1.30-8 OpenLDAP libraries
ii libreadline5 5.0-10 GNU readline and history libraries
ii libusb-0.1-4 2:0.1.10a-9.sarge.1 userspace USB programming library
ii makedev 2.3.1-81bpo1 creates device files in /dev
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-4.sarge.2 compression library - runtime

-- no debconf information


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Norbert Tretkowski

unread,
Aug 8, 2006, 2:50:09 AM8/8/06
to
* Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> GnuPG in dapper fails to send a key to the keyserver when it
> contains a line with '^KEY'.

s/dapper/sarge/

Norbert

Norbert Tretkowski

unread,
Aug 9, 2006, 3:30:08 AM8/9/06
to
* Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> Patch is available here:
> http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-commits/2006-July/006580.html

James, could you please try to get this patch into 3.1r3?

Norbert

Norbert Tretkowski

unread,
Sep 1, 2006, 1:50:11 PM9/1/06
to
* Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> * Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> > Patch is available here:
> > http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-commits/2006-July/006580.html
>
> James, could you please try to get this patch into 3.1r3?

Okay, since 3.1r3 is released, and you didn't answer my mail... what
about getting this patch into 3.1r4?

0 new messages