On 07/09/10 02:01, Dan McGee wrote:
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Allan McRae<[email protected]> wrote:
On 07/09/10 01:15, Dan McGee wrote:
Keep in mind that "including directly" more than likely is a drawback.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are assembly routines involved in
both of these codebases which just makes the build process that much
more involved and we have to work it into our code. Not that I think
these routines change much upstream, but it is one more thing to keep
up to date.
Well, how often do we keep the current md5 code up to date? Has anyone
checked the upstream source lately? It may have gotten faster (and it is
still GPL2) making the whole thing moot, which it really is anyway... :P
I checked it before I this work, so every once in a while. :) The
PolarSSL source is also meant to be standalone whereas I'm not sure
with the other MD5 routines, which was convenient.
Our current code really lags when it comes to older processors it
seems, or things that use certain architectures- P4 or Atom processors
notably.
Well, all this looks to me that it is not worth the effort of doing
anything else.
BTW, the md5 code in coreutils is in a separate libs/md5.{c,h} that the
md5sum program includes and looks to have no assembly so could possibly
used if boredom sets in (for the version prior to GPL3 licensing).
Allan
