Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 23:20:39 +0200 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: ./john --test --format=crypt --subformat=BF (usage problem) On 06/07/2012 08:29 PM, magnum wrote: > On 06/07/2012 08:26 PM, magnum wrote: >> This patch format is fine, however since you're using git: If you >> produce your future patches with "git format-patch" instead of "git >> diff", the patch will contain author, commit description etc so I can >> just apply it (using "git am") and *everything* is set. > > Forget about the above, this was exactly what you did! :) Thanks, I was already starting to wonder how I could get that wrong. BTW, I noticed you renamed the subformats raw-sha256 and raw-sha512 to cryptsha256 and crypt512. Why? So that I can learn how to resolve merge conflicts? (I'll figure that out, no problem.) I thought that the "raw" is an attibute of the format (as in "no salts, no iteration count"). That's why I wanted to name those crypt subformats exactly like the formats. Otherwise, you'd have to rename --subformat=des to --subformat=cryptdes and --subformat=md5 to --subformat=cryptmd5 as well. And I think this would create additional confusion instead of reducing confusion (which is what I wanted to achieve with renaming those subformats to raw-sha*). 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.