Bojan Smojver wrote: > On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 21:24 -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > >> But given than RC4/RC5 are dead (RC4 needs to be killed ASAP with apr 2) >> it seems we really should export and document them for general use with >> apr 1.3 > > I see a whole bunch of functions named something like apr__SHA256_Data > etc. AFAIK, this is not normally what APR names look like, so I'm > guessing we should rename those to apr_sha256_data etc. and change > references in existing code to new names. These are public symbols, > however, so I don't know if changing them would break API compatibility > (given that they are not used outside APR). > > The private sha2.h should then become apr_sha2.h in the include > directory, I guess.
Yes - this sounds right. The apr__ convention was to denote internal symbols. And on some platforms they were not exported, they need to grow APR_DECLARE()'s. Hey Ben - do you have any comments on making the SHA2 implementation public? I had though you added it in the first place.
