Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 20:21:47 -0700 (MST) From: Brandon Gillespie <brandon@roguetrader.com> To: Mikael Karpberg <karpen@ocean.campus.luth.se> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: more general checksum command, replacing md5? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971028201921.22948A-100000@roguetrader.com> In-Reply-To: <199710290248.DAA07742@ocean.campus.luth.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, Mikael Karpberg wrote: > According to Brandon Gillespie: > > On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, Mikael Karpberg wrote: > > > > > According to Brandon Gillespie: > > > > Just curious, with the inclusion of SHS hashing in crypt(), would anybody > > > > consider a generalized checksum command? It wouldn't be too hard to make > > > > a general 'cs' or 'checksum' command that accepts arguments to determine > > > > the algorithm being used... ala: > > > > > > Er... Why not, in that case, just add those options to the chsum program? > > > > Because the checksum program is 'md5' > > I meant the 'cksum' program, ofcourse. And as you say, the one used is the > md5 program. That should have been an option in 'cksum' too, instead, I > think. Ofcourse, it could detect name started with to auto-select algorithm. > That way md5 could be made a hardlink to cksum. Ahh, I couldn't find cksum last time I checked... Hmm, and its POSIX... To fit within posix-ness, what about making the checksum CRC be similar to the passwd format.. namely, $TOKEN$HASH, where TOKEN is MD5, SHS or whatever... So: > md5 foof MD5 (foof) = edcee025269de378b1ce4714dcb97326 > cksum -md5 foof $MD5$edcee025269de378b1ce4714dcb97326 41658 foof How does POSIX look at expanding the functionality of a POSIX command? I.e. if it supports all POSIX functionality, but adds more? -Brandon Gillespie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971028201921.22948A-100000>