Evolution and GPG signing?

[mike cloaked]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org> wrote:
> On 03/22/2010 01:20 PM, mike cloaked wrote:
>> This is not an selinux issue - the summary is as follows:
>> Thunderbird sends signed mail to Thunderbird - all is fine
>> Thunderbird sends signed mail to Evolution - all is fine
>> Evolution sends signed mail to Evolution - all is fine
>> Evolution sends signed mail to Thunderbird and Thunderbird complains
>> about "signature verification failed" - so this is either a bug in Evo
>> or in TB (I am using TB 3.1b2 but it is more than likely this will be
>> the same in earlier versions -
>>
>> If anyone else uses signed mail and can confirm this behaviour it
>> would be useful - I would report this against bugzilla but I need to
>> know which component is the underlying problem.
>>
>>
> Check to make sure you are sending plain text. When sending plain text
> Thunderbird and Evolution should have no problem, but if you send html
> (eg. multipart/alternative) you are not going to get a good signature
> verification. I would be glad to run a couple of tests with you. Also,
> does it make a difference if you are sending inline or PGP/MIME.

I was sending HTML - and I will try with plaintext after seeing your
post - by the way this account I don't use in either TB or Evo but
from a web browser and did try firegpg for a while - but it caused a
load of problems in the browser so switched it off - I have multiple
mail accounts for different purposes  (work, family, friends, computer
stuff etc) and I don't always want them opened in the same client.

However I do note that TB sends HTML signed mail with no problems at
all - it just seems that it is Evo that may be unhappy unless it is
plaintext - why should there be a difference in signature verification
if plain text or HTML?

I will post back after a test mail....

-- 
mike c