> On May 27, 2016, at 5:41 PM, M.-A. Lemburg <mal at egenix.com> wrote: > > If we add this now, there should at least be an exit strategy > to remove the code again, when OpenSSL ships with the same > code, IMO. I think it is a clear win to have the fallback implementations in cases where people either don’t have OpenSSL or don’t have a new enough OpenSSL for those implementations. Not having the fallback just makes it more difficult for people to rely on those hash functions. — Donald Stufft
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4