Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:10:13 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: 1.7.9-jumbo 2011-11-23 17:42, Solar Designer wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 09:13:40AM -0600, jfoug wrote: >> When we start building J1, do we simply upconvert 1.7.8-j8, rebasing as >> 1.7.9-j1? If that is the plan, would we then roll up patches 0001- to >> 0030- into a 1.7.9-j2 (new features, etc)? > > This would work well for me, but I suspect that it's extra effort given > that magnum already has an updated tree. > > I am really not sure. I need to be able to review those patches somehow > before I sign the new jumbo patch and tarball, and a fully updated tree > is not the easiest thing to review. I think I'll upload "Jumbo RC" patches, one that fairly close equals jumbo-8 (close enough that the dynamic format is broken, because of changed base), a couple new ones (eg. a separate patch that fixes dynamic_fmt for the new MD5_std.c) and one that closely resembles the 30 incremental patches originally for jumbo-8. In the end you can call the sum of them "Jumbo-1" or not, they are just split this way for reviewing purposes. > BTW, for the icc-generated assembly files, I need PGP signatures from > magnum I guess. I sort of reviewed the one that got into -jumbo-8, but > it was time-consuming and unreliable. I mean, the wiki server might get > compromised, which would let an intruder modify a previously uploaded > file without me detecting that. So I have to be double-checking those > patches for lack of backdoors. ...Yes, this could be another reason to > switch to git. If you have icc you can just re-generate them using "make intrinsics". I would prefer that. magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.