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