On 05/31/2014 04:04 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (27/05/14 10:23), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:08:02AM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 09:36:29AM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (27/05/14 09:27), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 09:17 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (27/05/14 09:11), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 00:19 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
ehlo,
strchrnul() and mempcpy() are GNU extensions to libc
This patch add configure time test for this functions and provide
custom implementation if functions are not available.
patch is attached.
LS
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
Hello Lukas,
is it really necessary to have two definitions of
mempcpy()?
Yes,
libsss_crypt.so is built either with nss or with libcrypto.
Look into Makefile.am for details.
LS
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
Yes, I'm aware of that. I was just thinking if you could move the
definition into separate file and thus avoid code duplication...
No, there will be no benefit.
There isn't any shared file between two implementation of libsss_crypt.
static function can be easily inlined and I don't want to have conditional
definition of function in header file.
I wonder if using a "library" like gnulib might be useful in the long
run to handle cases like this? I'm not saying we should do it now, but
Problematic functions are in old stable code and only in one module.
SSSD has a lot of other dependencies I do not want to add another one.
since you are currently looking at glibc, XOPEN and other extension I
wonder what's your opinion here?
macro XOPEN is not related to these functions. It is different story :-)
bye,
Sumit
Yes, I prefer using code that was tested by others as well.
Also, unlike the includes pushed yesterday, I would prefer either a test
for these functions
The function strchrnul is used in confdb function parse_section
and it is indirectly tested in test_utils, simple_access-tests, sysdb-tests,
sysdb_ssh-tests
The function mempcpy is used in computation of has sha512.
I added new test for function s3crypt_sha512.
Thess passes with:
--with-crypto=nss
--with-crypto=libcrypto
with custom implementation of mempcpy
The last one can be tested with next diff:
diff --git a/src/util/crypto/nss/nss_sha512crypt.c
b/src/util/crypto/nss/nss_sha512crypt.c
index 11194e5..54f6cbd 100644
--- a/src/util/crypto/nss/nss_sha512crypt.c
+++ b/src/util/crypto/nss/nss_sha512crypt.c
@@ -29,11 +29,11 @@
#include <sechash.h>
#include <pk11func.h>
-#ifndef HAVE_MEMPCPY
+#undef mempcpy
+#define mempcpy mymempcpy
static void * mempcpy(void *dst, const void *src, size_t len) {
return (void*) (((char*)memcpy(dst, src, len)) + len);
}
-#endif /* HAVE_MEMPCPY */
/* Define our magic string to mark salt for SHA512 "encryption" replacement.
*/
const char sha512_salt_prefix[] = "$6$";
LS
Can you also add a memory leak check? See test_encrypt_decrypt.
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
