Robert Millan wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 08:38:54PM +0100, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > >> Robert Millan wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 03:56:26PM +0100, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> 2) Adaptation to the lack of gnulib abstraction layer on top of gcrypt >>>> >>>> >>> It seems that the usual way of importing gc-pbkdf2-sha1.c is by linking it >>> with gc-gnulib.c or gc-libgcrypt.c. Is this option problematic? >>> >>> >>> >> libgcrypt is done like this: >> >> libgcrypt API ----> Common cryptographic algorithms layer (for some >> algorithms it's quite a passthrough) ---> ciphers >> >> Although we use ciphers from libgcrypt, our middle layer is much simpler >> and lacks per-cipher integer IDs. Because of it using gc-libgcrypt.c >> would require an additional level of wrapping and it's much easier to >> just modify few lines in PBKDF2 >> > > Ok. Then in principle we wouldn't contemplate resyncing this file, right? > > Unless there will be a cryptographic or legal issue, no. PBKDF2 is a static standard > What version of libgcrypt should be imported? > > I used 1.4.4. Latest ChangeLog entry in cipher/ directory is:
2009-01-22 Werner Koch <w...@g10code.com>
* ecc.c (compute_keygrip): Remove superfluous const.
Latest SVN has latest ChangeLog entry:
2009-08-21 Werner Koch <w...@g10code.com>
* dsa.c (dsa_generate_ext): Release retfactors array before
setting it to NULL. Reported by Daiko Ueno.
and ChangeLog doesn't mention anything that would result in a different
import, except of the currently unused public-key cryptography files
(and which will require adaptations in import_gcry.py to be handled) and
unused files md.c/cipher.c included in import for reference.
So I recommend importing 1.4.4
--
Regards
Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
