[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP34807D5FF8F7653F732921CFDE60@phx.gbl>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 19:42:29 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Update to TS (new formats, SHA2, and other changes)
On 06/28/2012 07:25 PM, jfoug wrote:
> I have all of those in there. Many of them made no sense to me (why change
> -enc:utf8 to --encode=utf8) ??? But all of them are there.
When working on the bash completion script, I noticed that several times
(due to the invention of new option names) abbreviated option names
which previously were not ambiguous became ambiguous.
So, using the complete option name instead of an abbreviation (-w:
/-enc:) was just a precaution measure to avoid problems with future john
versions.
> The hidden options (missing -list=sub, etc), certainly were required, and
> the code appears working properly. I know using canonical format (if
> --encode=utf8), makes sense if using it in a bash shell, but the TS does not
> do that, so I really do not know the reason why it was done.
Using -option: or --option= is probably a matter of taste.
I voted for --option=, because that is the form listed in the usage
output and in all the docs.
But feel free to change it back to -option: if you like, or tell me to
prepare a patch to use -option: instead of --option=.
I wouldn't want to re-introduce abbreviated option names, to avoid
naming conflicts in future john versions.
Frank
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
