Renaming AES to AES-128
wk at gnupg.org
Thu Dec 2 12:40:24 CET 2010
On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:40, bernhard at intevation.de said:
> Leaving the primary identifier like it was, is a source of confusion
> which also has a cost. What is the cost and consequences of the ABI change?
Debian alone lists 225 packages depending on libgcrypt. And there are
for sure many more users. All these packages would need a rebuild and
the maintainers need to go over it to figure out whether the change may
You don't change an ABI if there is not a serious reason to do that.
Those who want to list "AES-128" instead of AES may easily use a wrapper
const char *
cipher_algo_name (int algo)
if (algo == GCRY_CIPHER_AES)
return gcry_cipher_algo_name (algo);
> deprecated so it will go away after X years. Could there be software that
> would still stumble then?
We can't know.
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
More information about the Gnupg-devel