Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 21:29:47 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: FMT_MAIN_VERSION changes On 15 Jan, 2013, at 21:06 , Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote: > On 01/15/2013 08:56 PM, magnum wrote: >> On 15 Jan, 2013, at 20:27 , Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote: >>> 2. >>> Should we enhance listconf_list_method_names() to include "source" for >>> FMT_MAIN_VERSION > 9? >>> Function listconf_parse_late() would need to be enhanced as well, to >>> handle "source" for FMT_MAIN_VERSION > 9. >>> >>> Then, it should work for bleeding-jumbo as well. >> >> >> There is no point in committing any such thing to unstable but we could do it to bleeding. Then we'd need no ifdefs for that matter. By the way, bleeding will soon have FMT_MAIN_VERSION 11. > > Are the changes intended for FMT_MAIN_VERSION 11 (compared to 10) > discussed or listed somewhere? Pathes were posted in July. AFAIK they are not yet in core CVS. http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2012/07/17/11 http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2012/07/18/2 http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2012/07/18/7 We should discuss them more than we did. Maybe we will once they get merged to bleeding (RSN). > Can additional changes be suggested until FMT_MAIN_VERSION is changed to 11? Sure! But you'll have to convince Solar. I will not let my branches diverge from core (or planned core) interfaces. magnum
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.