* Henning Makholm: > Scripsit Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> You may laugh if you wish, but I think it's annoying to have to move to >> a hash function whose hexadecimal representation takes 64 bytes, which >> doesn't leave much room on an 80-column line to describe what the hash >> is hashing. Maybe by the time coreutils ships a sha256sum program, the >> world will have settled upon BASE64, which requires only 43 bytes. > > Why wait for the world to settle? Would there be anything wrong with > writing a sha256sum program that outputs base64 right now?
I wouldn't use real base64, though, because it would mean that you can use its hashed output as a file name. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
