Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 19:15:02 -0400 From: Rich Rumble <richrumble@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: --fork under Cygwin On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 6:46 PM, <jfoug@....net> wrote: > I would REALLY like someone else that has worked with this look at it, > before I poopoo it. I have never used fork before, and simply tried to run > with a 1 hash file, and -fork -inc:all. It wrote some fork messages out > (4 of them, I think). There were numerous johns running, some listed as > <defunct> some said they were running. Also numerous bashes. It 'appeared' > like what I would expect for a forking process. However, things were not > running, and were NOT killable. The processes would not even go away with > a kill from another shell, or any amount of ^C's or ^D's I had to use a > win32 process manager to clean up the mess. > I've had that happen, john forks into it's processes, loads the hashes, and 6 out of 8 (for example) never use any CPU. The very first or second contest version I had the least trouble with, but it was also used the least. The main issue initially as I saw it was the forks were not saving cracks to the pot, but would print to the screen, so if I diff'd the screen output and the POT file, I'd have very different results. magnum(i think?) introduced a switch in the config to write cracks to the stats file which works well. I need to compile a recent version of Fork/Node on cygwin and report back. I'm out for a bit, but I should have more in 24hrs or so to report on my own testing. Might want to search out some of my old Fork/Node emails... -rich Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.