On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 19:14:15 +0200 Francesco Poli wrote: > On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 08:59:34 +0200 Werner Koch wrote: > > > On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 22:21, [email protected] said: > > > > > In the meantime, dear Werner, is there any additional information > > > I could provide to help you in pinpointing the bug? > > > > No, this is pretty obvious. Although I would not call it a bug ;-) > > Well, OK, let's call it a feature request: I would like to have an > option to suppress (or, at least, to super-summarize) the additional > lengthy output...
Hello again Debian GnuPG Maintainers! It seems to me that the upstream issue has been marked as resolved. Do I understand correctly that the fix has already landed in Debian testing (version 2.2.2-1)? At least, it seems to me that gpg is no longer so verbose, when refreshing keys. If this is confirmed, then I would say that the bug report on the Debian BTS could be closed as fixed in gnupg2/2.2.2-1 ... Please let me know. Thanks a lot for your help and support! -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
pgp038vlgF4P3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
