Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 12:37:50 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Call for musl-based distro blurbs On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 06:38:34PM +0200, Daniel Cegiełka wrote: > > Couldn't you just remove the idiotic asm generation and use the C > > code? It's the compiler's job, not the build scrips' job, to generate > > asm, and the compiler probably does a perfectly acceptable job, if not > > a better job... > > > > > The problem is to maintain support for future versions. In my view, the > option with generating the asm code is easier and fully compatible with > openssl (code from openssl). By adding own implementations of the crypto > algorithms one can also add his own bugs. With this issue we can ask the > developers of openssl - ask how they see the idea to remove perl from > openssl. I'm nearly sure they have C versions of the code too for cpus they don't explicitly support. The asm is just a (premature) optimization, so removing it should not harm anyone. Rich
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.