Thanks for the review~
Well, as for allowing the missing options, I am not sure how useful or
how frequently people use them. As for me, I find them a bit too
ambiguous to my liking. I think there are other more useful bugs to fix
than spending time on this. So far, no bug report regarding support for
missing options, thus, no plan for looking into this (yet).
As for not including the Supported* values, it's mostly due to
priorities and effort trade-offs. For example, updating the Ucrypto
provider w/ latest list of supported Solaris algos would happen before
adding them...
Thanks,
Valerie
On 12/17/2014 3:36 PM, Bradford Wetmore wrote:
I think this is ok.
I have a recollection our Cipher.getInstance() provider selection
mechanism (getTransforms()) allows for missing options:
"AES//NoPadding" "AES/ECB/" But it's been a while since I've looked
at this. These ucrypto values look like they must be completely
specified. Is that something to look into for down the road?
One other point, is there a reason why we're not including the
Supported* values in ucrypto?
Brad
On 12/17/2014 3:18 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
Hi, Brad,
Can you please review this straightforward Ucrypto fix? This is about
adding aliases to the AES and RSA ciphers of OracleUcrypto provider.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/8043349/webrev.00/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043349
Thanks,
Valerie
