Darren J Moffat wrote:
Danek Duvall wrote:
On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 03:18:16PM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
Given you already depend on OpenSSL anyway why is it preferable to
use the (very likely slower) Python hashlib version than a highly
optimised (using appropriate cpu asm code) OpenSSL version ?
hashlib has a back-end that links against libcrypto, and uses that if
it's
been built, but has its own fallbacks otherwise. So by using hashlib, we
don't have a direct dependency on openssl, but will use it if we can.
That sounds good.
> This makes the pkg(5) code more portable, but still get the
performance we want
on our core platforms.
Great, but won't we need to depend on OpenSSL for signing anyway ?
Yes... but signatures are optional, and the signature action could
easily be extended to use pgp or other mechanisms.
- Bart
--
Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance
[email protected] http://blogs.sun.com/barts
"You will contribute more with mercurial than with thunderbird."
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
