Re: how do I by-pass the signature check?

["Russell L. Harris" <rlharris hal-pc org>]

On 06/26/04 03:22:23, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
> Am 26.06.04 04:13 schrieb(en) Russell L. Harris:
> > Please forgive me if my posting appeared hostile; it's just that I  
> > am weary of seeing the "signature cannot be verified" warning box  
> > and
>
> No, your feedback is really valuable and helpful!
>
> > I would suggest that a it should be a high priority that Balsa be
> [snip discussion about ergonomically-friendly ui]
> > time a signature cannot be verified.
>
> As I said yesterday, I agree fully with you that we must find a  
> simple solution for this problem. I'm not yet sure about the best  
> way, though.
>
> However, I was a little confused about my own code yesterday ;-) -  
> the dialog shown is actually a standard warning box. I moved the "run  
> gpg..." button into the message itself a while ago. So you can get  
> rid of the popup (and other warnings, e.g. if the message includes 8- 
> bit chars, but no describing mime header) by just changing the pref  
> for warnings from "show dialog" to "nothing" or "terminal". The  
> signatures will still be checked, but the only feedback you get is  
> the red padlock, and of course the explanation in the message itself.  
> Would this be a (temporary) solution for you?
>
> I think I should note at this point that the method for retreiving  
> missing keys is not perfect. In the long run, balsa should use an  
> external app like seahorse or gpa to do this job. Seahorse  
> development seems to be a little stalled, though. I am currenttly  
> working on a port to gpgme 0.4 series for it, but I'm still fighting  
> with a few routines, so progress is a snail. And we all have a family  
> and a job... :-/
>
> Cheers, Albrecht.


Greetings, Albrecht.

After reading your message to Pawel, I was able to solve the problem of  
the signature; I discovered for myself the solution which you describe.   
And yes, this IS a a very reasonable temporary solution.
So now, I can "clean out" the spam from the IN box using only the mouse  
on the TRASH icon.  Forgive me for failing to look over the menus  
before lodging a compliant.

Before discovering Linux, I used Eudora PRO in Windows -- for about  
five years.  As you probably know, Eudora is the most popular mail  
client for Windows -- at least, this was the case until everyone  
started using Outlook Express.  And so I tend to judge every mail  
client in the light of Eudora.  But I must say that, in all but a few  
minor points, I have come to prefer Balsa over Eudora.

One feature of Eudora which I have not yet discovered in Balsa is the  
ability to send a message again -- typically, modifying an address or  
some other detail before re-sending the message.  By "sending again", I  
mean specifically to a copy to the DRAFT box a message from the SENT  
box, while leaving the original message in the SENT box.  With Balsa, I  
am able to TRANSFER a message from the SENT box to the DRAFT box and  
then modify and re-send it, but then I have lost the record of the  
original message.  Of course, I can copy to myself each message I send,  
but I prefer to retain in the SENT box a copy of everything I have  
sent.

RLH
Houston, Texas