Re: [arch-general] Stronger Hashes for PKGBUILDs

2018-05-14 Thread Leonid Isaev via arch-general
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:01:57AM -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > We're currently in feature freeze for pacman 5.1 > > Anyone who hopes to have b2sum support in *future* versions of pacman, > would be well advised to come across as a person seeking to extend > support for the

Re: [arch-general] Stronger Hashes for PKGBUILDs

2018-05-14 Thread Eli Schwartz via arch-general
On 05/14/2018 10:48 AM, Leonid Isaev via arch-general wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:23:39AM +0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote: >> Hi Eli, >> >>> Maybe you could ask the coreutils developers whatever happened to >>> implementing Keccak checksumming tools. >> >> SHA-3? Have you see >>

Re: [arch-general] Stronger Hashes for PKGBUILDs

2018-05-14 Thread Leonid Isaev via arch-general
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:23:39AM +0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > Hi Eli, > > > Maybe you could ask the coreutils developers whatever happened to > > implementing Keccak checksumming tools. > > SHA-3? Have you see > https://www.imperialviolet.org/2017/05/31/skipsha3.html > I've also seen

Re: [arch-general] Stronger Hashes for PKGBUILDs

2018-05-14 Thread Ralph Corderoy
Hi Eli, > Maybe you could ask the coreutils developers whatever happened to > implementing Keccak checksumming tools. SHA-3? Have you see https://www.imperialviolet.org/2017/05/31/skipsha3.html I've also seen suggestions that the Keccak team push Kangaroo Twelve these days over SHA-3 due to