[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Don't you think there are too many *sum utilities?

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: Don't you think there are too many *sum utilities?
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 15:26:27 +0200 (CEST)

   > Why not just: hashsum ALGORITHM [FILE]? A optional hashing
   > algorithm seems pointless for this.

   Because on decoding, 'hashsum -c FILE' could be made smart enough
   to auto-detect the algorithm based on the length of the hash, but
   only if the algorithm is optional (--md5) rather than required
   (md5).  Currently, md5, sha1, sha224, sha256, sha384, and sha512
   all produce different hash lengths, making this task unambiguous
   (but I'm not sure how long md4 is).

That might cause problems if in the future if there ever is a hashing
algorithm that is as long as say sha256, but produces something vastly

   At any rate, since cksum is specified by POSIX, and since sum has a
   different output format, it is much harder to combine those two
   into a proposed hashsum than it is to join md5 and sha* sums.

Also, more importantly, who wants to implement this? :-)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]