Re: sort/shuf/shred: support fixed random-seed

[Assaf Gordon]

Hello Pádraig,

On 02/09/2015 12:22 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
<...>
> No counter arguments, which is surprising.

For me,
your 'openssl' trick to generate reproducible (not so) random data was good 
enough - perhaps if it's documented it will suffice?

> Anyway personally I prefer the --random-seed option
> as it's neater, has less deps, and is about 10% faster even with hardware 
> assist.
>
> As for the --random-seed interface.
> Should we be supplying a string rather than an int?
> At least we need to cater for endianness issues with an int,
> but a string might be easier to use.

I do like it as well, but I'm biased...

If we decide to continue with '--random-seed', I can work on improved patch to 
implement that.

Thanks,
- Assaf