Guenter Knauf wrote:
was still something wrong with my last patch?
Just the timing ;-)
It was a little too close to release time,
and applying it, adjusting NEWS and the commit log,
reviewing, and testing would have taken time I didn't have.
And the fact that you haven't filed copyright
Hi Jim,
Jim Meyering schrieb:
Guenter Knauf wrote:
was still something wrong with my last patch?
Just the timing ;-)
It was a little too close to release time,
and applying it, adjusting NEWS and the commit log,
reviewing, and testing would have taken time I didn't have.
no prob.
And the
Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi Jim,
Jim Meyering schrieb:
Guenter Knauf wrote:
was still something wrong with my last patch?
Just the timing ;-)
It was a little too close to release time,
and applying it, adjusting NEWS and the commit log,
reviewing, and testing would have taken time I didn't
Guenter Knauf info at gknw.de writes:
And the fact that you haven't filed copyright assignment paperwork.
Your change is under the 10-15-line threshold if we look only at the
changes to md5sum.c, yet over if we also count the added tests.
I've applied the patch, but would appreciate it if
Hi Jim,
was still something wrong with my last patch?
Günter.
Since the patch is really small I would like to ask you for a review
without urging me to go through all the git stuff;
It's really not that hard.
Have you looked at the instructions here?
http://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/plain/HACKING
if you accept the
simple patch then I will
Hi Jim,
Jim Meyering schrieb:
Would you like to write the patch (including NEWS and
a small doc update), following these guidelines?
http://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/plain/HACKING
I've just tested a bit, and it seems that its enough to hack around the
first place where the blank can
Jim,
thanks for the very quick review.
Jim Meyering schrieb:
Guenter Knauf wrote:
- size_t i;
+ size_t i = 0;
bool escaped_filename = false;
size_t algo_name_len;
- i = 0;
while (ISWHITE (s[i]))
++i;
Instead, please move the declaration down.
hmm, not sure what you
Guenter Knauf wrote:
Jim,
thanks for the very quick review.
Jim Meyering schrieb:
Guenter Knauf wrote:
- size_t i;
+ size_t i = 0;
bool escaped_filename = false;
size_t algo_name_len;
- i = 0;
while (ISWHITE (s[i]))
++i;
Instead, please move the declaration down.
Hi Jim,
Jim Meyering schrieb:
This is what I meant:
...
- i = 0;
+ size_t i = 0;
while (ISWHITE (s[i]))
++i;
ok, added.
make check runs most tests.
Use this
make check -C tests TESTS=misc/md5sum VERBOSE=yes
to run just the one you changed.
thanks, tests passed:
PASS:
Hi Jim,
Jim Meyering schrieb:
But it's even easier to convert openssl's format
into one that is recognized. Filter it through this:
sed 's/(/ (/;s/\(= [0-9a-f]*\)$/ \1/'
E.g.,
$ touch f; openssl md5 f
MD5(f)= d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
$ openssl md5 f | sed
Guenter Knauf wrote:
Jim Meyering schrieb:
But it's even easier to convert openssl's format
into one that is recognized. Filter it through this:
sed 's/(/ (/;s/\(= [0-9a-f]*\)$/ \1/'
E.g.,
$ touch f; openssl md5 f
MD5(f)= d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
$ openssl md5 f
Hi all,
suprisingly I just found that md5sum and sha1sum also accept the formats
of the md5 and sha1 tools as input with option -c. There's though a
third checksum format which is produced by the openssl tool which only
slightly differs to the format from md5 and sha1 - two blanks are
missing ...
Guenter Knauf wrote:
suprisingly I just found that md5sum and sha1sum also accept the formats
of the md5 and sha1 tools as input with option -c. There's though a
third checksum format which is produced by the openssl tool which only
slightly differs to the format from md5 and sha1 - two blanks
14 matches
Mail list logo
