[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55EC9822.3050704@cox.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 14:46:42 -0500
From: JimF <jfoug@....net>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: auditing our use of FMT_* flags
Well that makes sense on why my 'before' tests were not showing
problems. It should
be testable now, and should not show a problem for these formats.
But like I said, if that is supposed to be the behavior, AND that bit
needs to be valid
prior to init(), then the test was 100% correct listing that those 3
formats were lacking
having that bit set.
On 9/6/2015 2:40 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 02:30:13PM -0500, JimF wrote:
>> What is the 'secret handshake' to test this? just -test-full ?
> I think Kai hasn't committed his patch to test FMT_SPLIT_UNIFIES_CASE to
> magnum's repository yet, because we had not approved the patch.
>
> The patch is referenced here:
>
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2015/08/27/1
>
> And yes, I think it is invoked with --test-full.
>
> Alexander
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.
