an additional requirement on kdelibs

[Marc Espie]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 07:51:44PM +1100, Brad Hards wrote:
> On Monday 05 March 2007 22:33, Jos van den Oever wrote:
> > > Why does it use libssl?  In any case we have always avoided a linked-
> > > in libssl, as you can see from KSSL.  That dlopens openssl, which is
> > > very memory-heavy.
> >
> > The only reason is the sha1 routine. We could just include it in the code.
> > I'm open to suggestions of fast sha1 implementations.
> Do you even need a cryptographic hash? Are you just looking for something that 
> doesn't suffer too many accidental collisions?

For that matter, if you keep up with recent cryptography, you won't call
sha1 a `cryptographic hash'. It's just a hash, it's half-way through broken
recently.

Personally, I think a sha1 implementation could live along kdefakes, just
to avoid duplicating it all over the place...

Realize BSD systems have a SHA1 implementation in their libc. One you could
steal (public domain, in fact!) and even revert to using the system one
when it exists...

(and yes, I'm getting fed up of my system having about 50+ versions of sha1
compiled).