From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/982 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christian Neukirchen Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Call for musl-based distro blurbs Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 19:39:00 +0200 Message-ID: <87k3zjowcr.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20120607140843.GX17860@port70.net> <4FD0C208.6050004@int3.at> <20120607144916.GA163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <874nqnqgfi.fsf@gmail.com> <20120607154701.GC163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <4FD0D2DE.4020208@int3.at> <4FD0D15C.3050907@lightcubesolutions.com> <20120607161649.GD163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120607163750.GF163@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <4FD0DF83.4000208@gentoo.org> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1339090791 1494 80.91.229.3 (7 Jun 2012 17:39:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 17:39:51 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-983-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Jun 07 19:39:49 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ScggS-0003kw-7a for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 19:39:44 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 30330 invoked by uid 550); 7 Jun 2012 17:39:44 -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 30322 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2012 17:39:44 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XzF7HY3U1oLMCQ9CQ3j5E04rm9g0w0jpItbxeIteDz8=; b=Jdm2ZTIyAwDn31LBg3NnXnBQzBbCpaa5Kbb0qaGxtE4B1rzXTB+aIil0F22shV4i4W e3i036U5STOXfOIC6esWOM8ILhowDLiXJeCZmykqQQdoSdM6KGt5M1wSPVUvunS6zxmL blVKB1BNUEenJkkrX9voPbsbAflDHJezpJYAPTg8QgVxAwNx9cNGmCOIlih6vjQkdfsi 4Bozq3mC3d5ffLXl1m6MsYHJ363det34X9NUeCjlMuTfJHIRZ1CFmJAg08nDpXC7q7C6 0osxhrWICG4ZbCYXC1nuQ8YoFFM+v7r6qvVOZfQy7cotKyPTLCzRPjxSVdIYzmfu1M8f nlPw== In-Reply-To: <4FD0DF83.4000208@gentoo.org> (Luca Barbato's message of "Thu, 07 Jun 2012 19:06:11 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:982 Archived-At: Luca Barbato writes: > On 06/07/2012 06:37 PM, Rich Felker wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 06:38:34PM +0200, Daniel Cegie=C5=82ka wrote: >>>> Couldn't you just remove the idiotic asm generation and use the C >>>> code? It's the compiler's job, not the build scrips' job, to generate >>>> asm, and the compiler probably does a perfectly acceptable job, if not >>>> a better job... >>>> >>>> >>> The problem is to maintain support for future versions. In my view, the >>> option with generating the asm code is easier and fully compatible with >>> openssl (code from openssl). By adding own implementations of the crypto >>> algorithms one can also add his own bugs. With this issue we can ask the >>> developers of openssl - ask how they see the idea to remove perl from >>> openssl. >>=20 >> I'm nearly sure they have C versions of the code too for cpus they >> don't explicitly support. The asm is just a (premature) optimization, >> so removing it should not harm anyone. > > Or since the aim is tiny, just use polarssl. Or, hey, let's start a mussl! --=20 Christian Neukirchen http://chneukirchen.org