Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 19:11:13 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: int crypt_all(count, salt) magnum - On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:06:59PM +0200, magnum wrote: > On 2012-07-21 15:27, Solar Designer wrote: > > As discussed on IRC yesterday, attached is a patch that implements "int > > *count", but not set_mask() yet. As discussed, for your initial > > ... > > I've attached two files implementing the same changes: > > > > john-184.108.40.206-crypt_all-pcount-1.diff - applies on top of clean 220.127.116.11 > > as found in CVS. > > This patch includes everything new, right? Yes, it has everything that I prepared for myrice's experiments so far. > Should I merge this into > bleeding? I thought they were going into CVS soon so I waited (because > it will be better for future git history) but it's still not in. I think I'll get something like this into CVS eventually - I'm not sure how soon that will be. Do you want to have this in bleeding, even though you'll need to replace it with whatever gets committed to CVS later? FYI, I expect that myrice will take a short break, so having this in bleeding won't be helping the project yet. Now, in case we want to merge the PG-test stuff into bleeding, we'll definitely need these changes in bleeding first. But do we want this stuff in there, with the hard-coded appended chars? > Also, I should bump FMT_MAIN_VERSION to 11, right? It would make it > easier to do version-independant formats. When we do get this into a jumbo tree, yes. Thanks, 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.