* Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx> wrote: > But that doesn't mean that that isn't a WORKAROUND for something > that should happen in the first place. ... Maybe you are just asking for one more -o keyword without realising it. 'key=<file>' which expects a plain keyfile, just like 'gpgkey=<file>' expects a .gpg Would be my choice instead of messing around with .gpg handling. It just doesn't make any sense at all to have a passwordless .gpg --- Thinking along these lines... Imagine some plain text embedded into a word document and trying to tune a converter to get your hands on the text instead of using a plain textfile in the first place. -- left blank, right bald
Attachment:
pgp00003.pgp
Description: PGP signature