[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7b0fa9165a28bd00af1e3510fe372645@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 23:55:11 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Incremental mode in 1.7.9.14
On 19 May, 2013, at 0:57 , Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 12:26:47AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
>> On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 09:43:02PM +0200, magnum wrote:
>>> I am on the road, I can hopefully test within 24h.
>>
>> OK. I will likely have a better version for you to test a few hours later.
>
> I've attached the better version of the charset.c patch. Please test.
Re-running the various tests I did earlier, the new version wins over unstable in all cases. So that is good now. I'm glad we found this issue.
Back to my original concern: With this patch, we exhaust length 1 at candidate number 2778514 and length 2 at 458516707. Changing that "est floor" formula from 0.9 to 1.0 for length 0 (1) doesn't make any difference anymore. I'll continue experimenting and I'll also try to establish when we have exhausted length 3 and 4 without (and maybe with) changes from this version.
magnum
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.
