Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 23:02:35 +0200 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Inconsistent dragonfly 3/4 format names intended? I noticed a minor inconsistency in the naming of dragonfly formats: $ grep -n "#define FORMAT_NAME" dragonfly?_fmt.c|cut -b 1-20,46- dragonfly3_fmt.c:32:"DragonFly BSD $3$ SHA-256 w/ bug, 32-bit" dragonfly3_fmt.c:33:"DragonFly BSD $3$ SHA-256 w/ bug, 64-bit" dragonfly4_fmt.c:32:"DragonFly BSD $4$ SHA-512 w/ bugs, 32-bit" dragonfly4_fmt.c:33:"DragonFly BSD $4$ SHA-512 w/ bugs, 64-bit" Unless it is intentional to use "w/ bugs" for dragonfly4 and "w/ bug" for dragonfly3, this should be unified, unless the dragonfly3 algorithm really has just one bug, and dragonfly4 algorithm more than one. Since I don't really know whether the difference is intended, or what magnum prefers, I'll not attach such a trivial patch. (But I would vote for the shorter name.) 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.