[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 20:55:11 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: 1.7.9 Jumbo
2011-12-02 02:53, 'Solar Designer' wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 03:30:37PM +0100, magnum wrote:
>> Yes, Jumbo... I'll cc Solar on this:
>
> Thanks! In fact, I think this would be best discussed on john-dev.
>
>> I guess a decent first Jumbo would
>> be to only use patches 0001..0012, 0019, 0023..0024 and 0026..0028. That
>> would be something very similar to Jumbo-8 but with bugfixes and BSS
>> reduction. What we are doing now is "next gen" and certainly in a state
>> of flux.
>
> Makes sense to me. (I did not check the specific patch numbers yet,
> but I like the proposed approach with separating more conservative
> changes from "next gen" in general.)
Apart from the already mentioned, patch 0031 is needed too as well as
0032 (I suppose). And 0035 should be included too. A tree with that list
of patches passes all tests for all builds I can produce.
Actually the current full set of incremental patches, up to and
including 0035, passes all tests too but that tree is probably in more
need of testing for BE and/or alignment problems.
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.
