I feel a certain obligation to start using some crypto stuff, but I'm
a little bewildered by the fact that there are two alternatives ---
pgp and gpg --- available.
gpg seems to be the preferable choice for me:
1. it is less restricted in licensing use, so I don't have to ask
myself every time I use it whether a particular message is
commercial or not;
2. the pgp command-line I got for linux seems much less
well-documented and easy to use than the gpg that came with my red
hat.
Question: is gpg fully compatible with pgp so that I could use gpg
happily? Or is it incompatible, in which case adopting it means that
there'll be nobody I can exchange encrypted messages with? I have a
document that is supposed to explain how to use gpg as a pgp
replacement, but it's not very clear and does not seem up-to-date.
Thanks!
R
P.S. If there's a suitable RTF* type response to this question,
please feel free to point me to some source of information that's
readily available and accept my apologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tclug-list-unsubscribe at mn-linux.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tclug-list-help at mn-linux.org