On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 07:58:10PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 6:06 PM, brian m. carlson > <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > If the goal is to smoke out hardcoded SHA1s in tests, isn't it easier > to instrument SHA-1 (e.g. our blk_sha1 copy, or our wrappers) to > pretend that whenever we ask for the hash for STRING to pretend we > asked for SOME_PREFIX + STRING? > > Such an approach would have the advantage of being more portable > (easier to run these mock test), and also that if we ever move to > NewHash we could still test for this, we'd just always set the prefix > to compilation time(), and could thus guarantee that the hashes would > change every time git was built. That's certainly a possibility. We could simply call the update function from the init function and prepend a NUL byte or something like that, which would definitely produce different results. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
