Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 12:16:14 -0400
From: "Robert Harris" <>
To: <>
Subject: RE: Re: Problem running John on Windows when trying to crack sha512 encrypted /etc/shadow from Linux

-----Original Message-----
From: magnum [] 
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2014 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: [john-users] Re: Problem running John on Windows when trying to crack sha512 encrypted /etc/shadow from Linux

On 2014-09-13 18:57, Robert Harris wrote:
> I think I'm going to build the latest versions and put it on the
> custom-builds site.   I haven't done this in a while...

Great, I believe that would be appreciated by many users.

**Response by Robert**:  I actually have no idea if users like having the custom builds on the wiki, which is another reason I haven't built in a while.  I haven't heard much feedback.  Do we even count the downloads or here much feedback?

> Are we ever going to have a minor version number again, something like 
> john-1.8.1-jumbo-1?  We haven't had one in a while, and that is part 
> of the reason why I haven't made builds on the custom-builds wiki.

Perhaps someone would need to sponsor Solar for making a "proper" 
release. I guess he wants to, but doesn't ever get the time. I think we should not use the term "Jumbo-1" for anything other than a "proper" 
release by Solar.

> Is there an appropriate name for a bleeding edge build?  What a stable 
> (Is that even still around?)? If so, do you guys think it is better to 
> build stable or bleeding?
> Since we haven't used a minor unofficial build number in a while, is 
> there a time/version that is better to build?

The current bleeding-jumbo is based on latest core CVS, which is version with minor fixes over released 1.8.

The most canonical name you could use might be the Git commit hash, or just seven digits of it (that's kinda standard abbreviation). This would mean if you build from latest commit as of this writing, it could be called john-1.8-bleeding-jumbo-ef907c4. However, over time that hash wont tell a "user" anything about sequential order. For example, another release might be called john-1.8-bleeding-jumbo-154b96c but you can't tell from the names which is newer.

So perhaps it's better to just name it by date, as in "john-1.8-jumbo-20140914". If you chose this, please state what exact commit was used in some README file in the archive.

**Response by Robert**:  Is the stable user community enhancements still around?

That's just my two cents. Thanks!


This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

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.