On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:43:52 -0500, micah anderson wrote:
> Its good that this is not a burden to maintain for the notmuch project,
> even better that Mikhail, the libsha1 maintainer, is currently active in
> this project and has volunteered to maintain the in-tree copy.
>
> However, the
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 22:22:01 -0800, Carl Worth wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:28:03 -0600, "Jeffrey C. Ollie"
> wrote:
> > Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash, use
> > libgcrypt. This means less code of our own to maintain and it will be
> > easier to switch to a
Twas brillig at 21:28:03 27.11.2009 UTC-06 when jeff at ocjtech.us did gyre and
gimble:
JCO> Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash
xserver went this road, and now it has
--with-sha1=libc|libmd|libgcrypt|libcrypto|libsha1|CommonCrypto in
configure.
JCO> This means
Excerpts from Mikhail Gusarov's message of Sat Nov 28 04:31:15 +0100 2009:
>
> Twas brillig at 21:28:03 27.11.2009 UTC-06 when jeff at ocjtech.us did gyre
> and
> gimble:
>
> JCO> Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash
>
> xserver went this road, and now it has
>
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Carl Worth wrote:
>
> Have you actually *looked* at the implementation of libsha1.c that we
> have in notmuch? I can't say with 100% certainty that it's free of any
> buffer overruns, but I can see that it's not doing any memory allocation
> nor network
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Ingmar Vanhassel wrote:
>
> Most distributions have a rather strict policy to use system libraries
> over internal copies.
Fedora:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
Debian:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 9:31 PM, Mikhail Gusarov
wrote:
> Twas brillig at 21:28:03 27.11.2009 UTC-06 when jeff at ocjtech.us did gyre
> and gimble:
>
> ?JCO> Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash
>
> xserver went this road, and now it has
>
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 09:31:15 +0600, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
> JCO> This means less code of our own to maintain and
>
> As libsha1 maintainer I'm volunteering to maintain in-tree copy in
> notmuch :)
And Mikhail,
I wanted to thank you publicly for your maintenance work of libsha1. It
was a
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:28:03 -0600, "Jeffrey C. Ollie"
wrote:
> Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash, use
> libgcrypt. This means less code of our own to maintain and it will be
> easier to switch to a different hash function like SHA256.
I don't believe we have a
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 23:43:34 -0600, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Ingmar Vanhassel
> wrote:
> >
> > Most distributions have a rather strict policy to use system libraries
> > over internal copies.
>
> Fedora [...], Debian [...]
>
> If there are other distributions
Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash, use
libgcrypt. This means less code of our own to maintain and it will be
easier to switch to a different hash function like SHA256.
libgcrypt was chosen because it has a fairly simple API, it's well
tested (it's used in gnutls and
Excerpts from Mikhail Gusarov's message of Sat Nov 28 04:31:15 +0100 2009:
Twas brillig at 21:28:03 27.11.2009 UTC-06 when j...@ocjtech.us did gyre and
gimble:
JCO Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash
xserver went this road, and now it has
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 9:31 PM, Mikhail Gusarov
dotted...@dottedmag.net wrote:
Twas brillig at 21:28:03 27.11.2009 UTC-06 when j...@ocjtech.us did gyre and
gimble:
JCO Instead of including a private implementation of the SHA1 hash
xserver went this road, and now it has
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Ingmar Vanhassel ing...@exherbo.org wrote:
Most distributions have a rather strict policy to use system libraries
over internal copies.
Fedora:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
Debian:
14 matches
Mail list logo
