Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 01:45:30 +0200
From: magnum <>
Subject: Re: Fwd: bash auto-completion for john

On 05/11/2012 09:44 PM, Frank Dittrich wrote:
> On 05/11/2012 10:00 AM, magnum wrote:
>> On 05/11/2012 02:04 AM, Frank Dittrich wrote:
>>>> Now, I look forward to some more bash completion magic from Frank! 
>>> May be I'll not be able to work on this tomorrow. We'll see.
>>> But it shouldn't be too hard for you to extend the current logic.
>> I committed a first version using this. I believe there was a bug in
>> original line #163 - should there not be a %=* in that?
> I just tested this. I remembered correctly. Since for --rules and
> --single the values are optional (for the john-jumbo versions), they
> appear in $valopts without trailing '=', so there was no bug.

OK, I misunderstood the environment.

> I will change this.
> I'll redirect stderr to /dev/null.
> Then, I'll check $?.
> On success, I'll use the output of this command for expansion, otherwise
> I'll fall back to my old hard coded list.

Sounds like good ideas.

> For --rules= and --single=, I'll do the same.
> Non-jumbo versions don't allow optional parameters for -rules and
> single, but there might exist "older" jumbo versions which allow
> parameters for --rules and --single, but don't have --list=...

IMHO, I'd say we should (care to) support latest core and latest Jumbo
(in this case). Sure, the better we support old Jumbos, the better. But
let's not put hours of work for seconds of benefit.

> May be you'll have to wait for this version until Sunday.
> When do you plan to release a new jumbo version?
> Should bash completion be included in this version?

I really want this in next Jumbo. I do not know anything you don't, but
since Solar hasn't yet started talking for real about wrapping things
up, I presume we have several days at hand, if not weeks :)

> BTW, why did you name the /etc/bash_completion.d file
> john.bash_completion, and not just john (following the common naming
> convention)?
> Is it just that you think it is more likely a file named john already
> exists in /etc/bash_completion.d/, and you don't want to risk
> overwriting that file?

Long and boring story ;)

At first, I did not want to call it "john" in the src/ directory but my
intention was to copy it to "john" in /etc/bash_completion.d. However, I
made a mistake so it was copied with the source name. Then, I decided to
go with that, because if I'd change the name now, you (and the few
others that already tested this) would end up with the old file name
stuck forever in /etc/bash_completion.d and this could end up in tears.
I was very near changing it but I saw other files in there with similar


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.