From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7263 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Laurent Bercot Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: [RFC] sha2: new header Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 23:02:50 +0100 Message-ID: <5511DF0A.9050107@skarnet.org> References: <1427216271-141535-1-git-send-email-shawn@churchofgit.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1427234580 28954 80.91.229.3 (24 Mar 2015 22:03:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 22:03:00 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-7276-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue Mar 24 23:03:00 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YaWuZ-0002JY-7P for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 23:02:59 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 21716 invoked by uid 550); 24 Mar 2015 22:02:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 21698 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2015 22:02:57 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 In-Reply-To: X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: 0 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeektddrtddtgddugedvucetufdoteggodetrfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfpfgfogfftkfevteeunffgnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepkfffhfgfggfvufhfjggtgfesthejrgdttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepnfgruhhrvghnthcuuegvrhgtohhtuceoshhkrgdqughivghtlhhisggtsehskhgrrhhnvghtrdhorhhgqe Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7263 Archived-At: I think the main point isn't corner cases, the main point is that those functions (as well-written and useful as they are) are not standardized to be included in a libc, and that would make depending on them nonportable and/or hazardous. I agree with Rich's point: sha2 and other cryptographic functions have their place in a user library, not in a libc. -- Laurent