Hal Murray <hmur...@megapathdsl.net>:
> We currently have 2 and 1/4 crypto packages. That seems like the sort of
> things you like to clean up.
Yes.
> I would have said we have 2 1/2, but somebody deleted half of the 1/2. I
> assume that was part of the --enable-crypto cleanup. There used to be
> routines in libisc for MD5 and SHA1. md5.c is gone, but sha1.c is still
> there. There are also 2 header files in libisc/include/isc/: md5.h and sha1.h
md5.c isn't gone, it's in libntp.c. It's clearly the ISC code, so somebody
moved it there. Might have been me, though I do not remember doing this.
> We need sodium and OpenSSL. I don't know much about either, but 2 seems like
> the wrong number. Do we really need both? If so, why? I think we should
> have a paragraph someplace explaining why etc.
It depends on which MAC algorithms we want to support, a question I've opened
in a recent email. It looks like libsodium's support for hash functions in
our set is limited to SHA-2, so libsodium can't replace OpenSSL.
> We also need pointers to the documentation. I think I'd vote for a web page
> on our main web site with links to documentation for C99, POSIX, and all the
> packages we need.
I am *strongly* against creating a separate web page for this. I like
a single point of truth, and I write all our internal docs (including
INSTALL) in asciidoc exactly so they can be rendered to HTML and exposed
on the website when we deem it useful.
Therefore, no, not a separate web page. Instead, I request that the
infrastructure crew provide us with a facility to expose, as HTML on
the website, selected asciidoc pages that are *not* under docs/.
Then, INSTALL can be first on that list.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
