On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 11:08:32PM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: > You may laugh if you wish, but I think it's annoying to have to move to > a hash function whose hexadecimal representation takes 64 bytes, which > doesn't leave much room on an 80-column line to describe what the hash > is hashing. Maybe by the time coreutils ships a sha256sum program, the > world will have settled upon BASE64, which requires only 43 bytes. Why should we wait for the rest of the world to settle on a standard? Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature