[From nobody Thu Jul 16 11:20:10 2009
Received: (at 408421-done) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Jul 2009 11:15:26 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
	(2007-08-08) on rietz.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 18; hammy, 64; neutral, 49; spammy, 4.
	spammytokens:0.995-1--observe, 0.952-+--view,
	0.947-+--HX-Priority:Normal, 
	0.880-+--feedback hammytokens:0.000-+--gnupg, 0.000-+--reopen,
	0.000-+--reproduce, 0.000-+--bugreport, 0.001-+--H*F:U*daniel.leidert
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=4.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, HAS_BUG_NUMBER,
	RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=ham version=3.2.3-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Return-path: <daniel.leidert@wgdd.de>
Received: from 217-20-127-75.internetserviceteam.com ([217.20.127.75]
	helo=mail.wgdd.de) by rietz.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <daniel.leidert@wgdd.de>) id 1MROvu-0001TJ-7X
	for 408421-done@bugs.debian.org; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 11:15:26 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47269 helo=webmail.wgdd.de)
	by mail.wgdd.de with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <daniel.leidert@wgdd.de>) id 1MROvq-0002mM-Tx
	for 408421-done@bugs.debian.org; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:15:23 +0200
Received: from 94.223.202.82
	(SquirrelMail authenticated user daniel.leidert@wgdd.de)
	by webmail.wgdd.de with HTTP; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:15:23 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <5e7f851806008877839174befe3ec7d3.squirrel@webmail.wgdd.de>
In-Reply-To: <4A5F0A4C.8070607@hdm-stuttgart.de>
References: <1247740756.5922.26.camel@leidi>
	<4A5F0A4C.8070607@hdm-stuttgart.de>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:15:23 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: Bug#408421: gnupg: bad signature
From: "Daniel Leidert" <daniel.leidert@wgdd.de>
To: 408421-done@bugs.debian.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal

Alexander Loob wrote:
> I'm so sorry ... this went totally out of mind ...
>
> I've tested it short, but I can't reproduce this "bug" anymore. Maybe
> the changes since the bugreport solved this problem ...
> Out of my view, you can close this bugreport.

Doing so then :) Thanks for your feedback. If you again observe this problem,
please simply reopen your report.

Regards, Daniel


]