Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

Hi Junio, On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> Ideally, the existing one be annotated with prereq SHA1, and also > >> duplicated with a tweak to cause the same kind of (half-)collision > >> under the NewHash and be

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

Johannes Schindelin writes: >> Ideally, the existing one be annotated with prereq SHA1, and also >> duplicated with a tweak to cause the same kind of (half-)collision >> under the NewHash and be annotated with prereq NewHash. > > That's a good idea. I wonder whether

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

Hi Junio, On Sun, 25 Mar 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > > > What's the plan for oddball cases such as 66ae9a57b8 (t3404: rebase > > -i: demonstrate short SHA-1 collision, 2013-08-23) which depend > > implicitly upon SHA-1 without actually

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

Hi Brian, On Sun, 25 Mar 2018, brian m. carlson wrote: > This is a series to make our tests hash-independent. Many tests have > hard-coded SHA-1 values in them, and it would be valuable to express > these items in a hash-independent way for our hash transitions. > > The approach in this series

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 10:10:21PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: > What's the plan for oddball cases such as 66ae9a57b8 (t3404: rebase > -i: demonstrate short SHA-1 collision, 2013-08-23) which depend > implicitly upon SHA-1 without actually hardcoding any hashes? The test > added by 66ae9a57b8, for

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

Eric Sunshine writes: > What's the plan for oddball cases such as 66ae9a57b8 (t3404: rebase > -i: demonstrate short SHA-1 collision, 2013-08-23) which depend > implicitly upon SHA-1 without actually hardcoding any hashes? The test > added by 66ae9a57b8, for instance,

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 3:20 PM, brian m. carlson wrote: > This is a series to make our tests hash-independent. Many tests have > hard-coded SHA-1 values in them, and it would be valuable to express > these items in a hash-independent way for our hash transitions. >

[PATCH 00/10] Hash-independent tests (part 1)

This is a series to make our tests hash-independent. Many tests have hard-coded SHA-1 values in them, and it would be valuable to express these items in a hash-independent way for our hash transitions. The approach in this series relies on only three components for hash independence: git