Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: patch for strong encryption in vim, resending patch for vim7* dev branch.

Expand Messages
  • Mosh
    Bram, No more problems, it works on window32 bit (XP with VC60) and linux 64 bits gcc, ones I tested on. Note 1.The selftest routine is using my name as a
    Message 1 of 42 , May 3, 2010
      Bram,

      No more problems, it works on window32 bit (XP with VC60) and linux 64 bits gcc,
      ones I tested on.

      Note 1.The selftest routine is using my name as a testcase,
      i.e. self test is doing assert(encrypt(fixed string) == known-value),
      You can change the fixed string to anything else you like and insert
      the new result into the source code. This self test warns about
      any cross platform errors (like the one Dominque emailed about).

      thanks
      mohsin


      2010/5/3 Bram Moolenaar <Bram@...>:
      >
      > Mosh wrote:
      >
      >> Dominique,
      >>
      >> Resending the updated files as patch2.zip,
      >>
      >> 1. Fixed one issue with 64 bit gcc;  gcc did NOT issue any warnings for this:
      >>     unsigned long ul = 0xf1234567; // no warings from gcc or msvc
      >> compiler about sign extension happening here.
      >>     // ul = 0xfffffffff1234567;
      >> Changed to:
      >>     unsigned long ul = 0xf1234567U;
      >>
      >> 2 Some updates to sha2 and cleanup as you suggested below.
      >
      > What is the status of this patch now?  Any remaining problems?
      >
      > --
      > Everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die.
      >
      >  /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
      > ///        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
      > \\\        download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
      >  \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///
      >

      --
      You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
      Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
    • Tony Mechelynck
      ... Well, isn t that clause there to ensure that further dissemination won t be stopped, and that copyright restrictions (which expressly don t remove software
      Message 42 of 42 , May 17, 2010
        On 17/05/10 02:04, Jordan Lewis wrote:
        >
        >
        > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Tony Mechelynck
        > <antoine.mechelynck@... <mailto:antoine.mechelynck@...>> wrote:
        >
        > 2. "In the public domain".
        > </quote>
        >
        > This looks promising; but one part has a "note" in lawyerese and the
        > other a "defined term" in quotes, let us see... ah, I think this
        > clinches it, and since there is an "or" clause, no need (I think) to
        > check the other:
        >
        > <quote>
        > GTN "In the public domain"
        > GSN This means "technology" or "software" which has been made
        > available
        > ML 22 without restrictions upon its further dissemination.
        > Note Copyright restrictions do not remove
        > "technology" or "software" from being "in the public domain".
        > </quote>
        >
        > I believe that Vim is "in the public domain" within the definitions
        > used in that document (but of course, IANAL, nor do I play one on TV).
        >
        >
        > No, I don't think that Vim is "in the public domain" at all or even
        > according to this document. The definition you quoted has the key phrase
        > "without restrictions upon its further dissemination." Even the first
        > clause of Vim's license agreement here
        > http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/uganda.html#license requires
        > distributing the license itself alongside of any part of Vim that you
        > choose to distribute yourself. I believe that this requirement, although
        > trivial, constitutes a restriction upon further dissemination, which
        > removes it from the public domain classification.
        >
        > I am similarly NAL, though.
        >
        > - Jordan Lewis

        Well, isn't that clause there to ensure that further dissemination won't
        be stopped, and that copyright restrictions (which expressly don't
        remove software from the "public domain" as defined in that document)
        will be obeyed? All open-source software has similar requirements about
        the license being distributed together with it, it doesn't prevent
        further distribution.

        Oh well, IANAL, YANAL, I suppose that's the kind of red tape which means
        Bram had maybe better find a friendly Dutch lawyer knowing about
        cryptology software distribution out of Amsterdam.


        Best regards,
        Tony.
        --
        `When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to
        its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are
        forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how
        holy the motives' -- Robert A Heinlein, "If this goes on --"

        --
        You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
        Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
        For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.