simplifying rand_egd API

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

simplifying rand_egd API

Salz, Rich
There are currently three functions related to the EGD:
        int RAND_egd(const char *path);
        int RAND_egd_bytes(const char *path, int bytes);
        int RAND_query_egd_bytes(const char *path, unsigned char *buf, int bytes);

I would like to just have a single function
        Int RAND_add_egd(const char* path)

Does anyone use those three functions?
--  
Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies
IM: [hidden email] Twitter: RichSalz


_______________________________________________
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: simplifying rand_egd API

Steffen Nurpmeso-2
"Salz, Rich" <[hidden email]> wrote:
 |There are currently three functions related to the EGD:      
 |        int RAND_egd(const char *path);
 |        int RAND_egd_bytes(const char *path, int bytes);
 |        int RAND_query_egd_bytes(const char *path, unsigned char *buf\
 |        , int bytes);
 |
 |I would like to just have a single function
 | Int RAND_add_egd(const char* path)
 |
 |Does anyone use those three functions?

For obvious reasons preprocessor conditionalized i do maintain the
first.  Yes i think that is a sane one to have.  (Whereas
i personally don't have a strong opinion on that topic at all i do
think that having an easy way to use a random source of choice may
be interesting for, e.g., students or researchers.  So i truly
think that saying "please keep this interface" isn't backed by
noone, wether they speak up or not today.)

P.S.: i like the new website; i had Matt Caswell's message laying
around for many weeks but a reply never made it.  Not that it
matters, anyway.

Ciao,

--steffen
_______________________________________________
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: simplifying rand_egd API

Salz, Rich
> truly think that saying "please keep this interface" isn't backed by noone,
> wether they speak up or not today.)

Yes, I know.  It is however the best we can do.

My issue with the other two API's is that they are really EGD functions, not OpenSSL functions.


> P.S.: i like the new website; i had Matt Caswell's message laying around for
> many weeks but a reply never made it.  Not that it matters, anyway.

Always nice to hear a kind word.  Thanks!
_______________________________________________
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev