[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:52:20 -0800 |
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 1:10 PM Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 12:40 PM Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net> wrote:
> ...
> > - I'm inclined to work like the openbsd cksum and accept invocations
> > like "cksum -a sha1x" and "cksum -a sha1b". Any objection?
>
> Actually, I am now **disinclined** to implement this part. It'd make
> sense only if we were able to compute multiple checksums in a single
> invocation.
> Allowing that would require a fundamental redesign, which feels out of
> scope, at least initially.
Here's a proposed patch for that.
cu-cksum-base64.diff
Description: Binary data
- RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Jim Meyering, 2023/01/29
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Jim Meyering, 2023/01/29
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support,
Jim Meyering <=
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Pádraig Brady, 2023/01/30
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Jim Meyering, 2023/01/31
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Pádraig Brady, 2023/01/31
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Jim Meyering, 2023/01/31
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Pádraig Brady, 2023/01/31
- Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Jim Meyering, 2023/01/31
Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support, Pádraig Brady, 2023/01/30