Re: ANNOUNCE: balsa-2.1.90 released
- From: Albrecht Dreß <albrecht dress arcor de>
- To: Pawel Salek <pawsa theochem kth se>
- Cc: balsa-list gnome org, Jeffrey Stedfast <fejj stampede org>
- Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: balsa-2.1.90 released
- Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 17:51:01 +0000
Am 04.07.04 19:17 schrieb(en) Pawel Salek:
On 07/04/2004 05:24:23 PM, Craig Routledge wrote:
I personally aim at releasing 2.2.0 this week - before Saturday, in any
case. Whether it will actually happen is another question :). There are
still some open problems but I believe it is still worth to push for
In this case, it would be great if we could upgrade to the latest GMime
CVS release - IMHO the wrongly encoded From: header might be problematic.
It will be accepted by *most* mta's/mua's, but they clearly violate the
standards. Jeff, what do you think about releasing a new tarball?
2. mail signing and encryption is a more serious problem but I think the
right way to go about it is just to state the list of the problems and
attack them one after another. I am not a heavy crypto user in this
sense so I do not really know what is to be fixed. The things that come
to my mind are:
a. interoperability of crypto and Imap mailboxes.
b. boundaries problem with gmime.
I do not think a. is a show stopper. b is more serious one and I do not
quite know what to do about it.
These problems apply only to RFC 3156 (PGP/MIME, multipart/signed and
multipart/encrypted) stuff, RFC 2440 (aka OpenPGP) works just fine in
HEAD, also with imap. However, PGP/MIME *should* be the preferred method
Problem (a) is clearly something which must be fixed on Balsa's side. I
have no idea how to do that, though...
Problem (b) comes from GMime, but Jeff is working on a fix (right?). I
think we (Balsa) can not do anything about it. It is actually something
like a show stopper, as the signature verification of '3156 messages where
the signed content is again a multipart is not reliable, i.e. if an
invalid signature is reported, it may be invalid or it may be the gmime
bug... Otoh, if Jeff has a fix, there would be no need to rebuild Balsa, a
gmime rpm upgrade would be sufficient.
If we can really get a new gmime release for RH/Fedora, IMHO we should
also apply the postponed crypto patch of May 26th, as it contains some
speed-ups and removes a lot of "old" code. I could definitely produce a
new patch which applies cleanly to HEAD before next sunday.
Oh and there is a minor problem with MDN's in HEAD - I'll post the fix (a
tru one-liner) later today.
Albrecht Dreß - Johanna-Kirchner-Straße 13 - D-53123 Bonn (Germany)
Phone (+49) 228 6199571 - mailto:albrecht dress arcor de
Description: PGP signature
] [Thread Prev