[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:29:20 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Do we need --list=formats?
While for bash completion, parsing usage output is fine, a GUI might
want to list additional information, e.g. FORMAT_NAME and may be even
implementation details like [128/128 BS SSE2] (so that the user might
see which formats support OMP...)
How hard would implementing this be?
While we are at it:
Should we also add a --list=subformats, which does the same as
--subformat=LIST, except that it writes to stdout instead of stderr?
Then we could discourage the use of --subformat=LIST.
(My bash completion script could even try to replace --subformat with
--list=subformats.)
And in the next release we just get rid of --subformats?
Frank
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.
