[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <99aea6fe5bf8c7a064297d46b493b8e6@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 11:57:31 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Dyna renames (question)
On 6 Jun, 2013, at 23:29 , jfoug <jfoug@....net> wrote:
> If I made this change to dynamic naming.
>
> current:
> Benchmarking: dynamic_1, dynamic_1: md5($p.$s) (joomla) [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 10x4x3].
>
> change to:
> Benchmarking: dynamic_1: md5($p.$s) (joomla) [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 10x4x3].
>
> or even:
> Benchmarking: dynamic_1: md5($p.$s) (joomla) [SSE2 10x4x3].
>
> What type side effects would we be dealing with? and what would require changing? I assume benchmark_unify, possibly the *completion scripts.
I think benchmark-unify is the only thing that would need to adopt. The shell completion stuff only deals with format_label and that doesn't change.
> If I were to make these changes, what actual changes would be wanted?
Solar moved the cracking algo into algorithm_name too, eg. [MD5 128/128 SSE2]. For dynamic, an option would be using the full algo spec for that, like this:
Benchmarking: dynamic_1: (joomla) [md5($p.$s) 128/128 SSE2].
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.
