Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 20:08:34 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: format names for GPU-enabled implementations (was: Recent github patches) On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 07:31:20PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote: > ... I suspect that many users will be confused - if they > build using a GPU-enabled make target, they expect the GPU code to be > used by default (if available for a given hash type at all). Should we > possibly make this so? And how do we also keep the CPU and alternate > GPU code compiled in (and available for use as non-default), then? > Rename those other formats? > > Alternatively, should we possibly keep things as they are, but improve > documentation? Maybe have "make" runs with GPU-enabled targets end with > a note to the user on how to actually access the GPU functionality - > very brief instructions and/or a reference to a file like doc/GPU? Unfortunately, this alternative won't be sufficient for binary builds, once we have any GPU-enabled binary builds that we distribute. We'd need to have "john" print something at runtime as well when it has GPU code in it, is invoked on a GPU-enabled hash type, but without the proper --format option (so using the CPU only). %-) Alexander
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.