[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP1442919847176F1B9D4D473FD0D0@phx.gbl>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 10:09:58 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: benchmark-unify and relbench adjustments
On 10/25/2013 12:58 AM, magnum wrote:
> On 2013-10-24 14:01, Frank Dittrich wrote:
>> I was experimenting with another solution (this patch just checks an
>> environment variable instead of a new benchmark-unify option, but I can
>> provide a patch which introduces a --drop-labels option):
>> This will increase the number of benchmarks in bleeding that can be
>> compared with benchmarks in unstable, but it has unwanted side effects:
>>
>> -the user would need to run benchmark-unify even on the --test output of
>> the latest john version (so far I always aimed at converting older
>> output to the newest, and keeping the newest output unchanged)
>>
>> -in some cases, the format name will become (completely) meaningless
>> and/or ambiguous:
>
> Wouldn't the opposite be safer and easier: Only care about format label
> (anything up to first comma or bracket, and case insignificant). Then
> try to recognize common suffixes like -ng, -cuda, -opencl and -native.
> Finally make just a few hard-coded "fixes" (if needed).
I don't think so. Since all the older john versions didn't include the
label, you'd have to map every old format name of every old john version
to the label used in the latest version.
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.
