MD4 checksum fix

jw schultz jw at
Tue Apr 1 18:33:57 EST 2003

On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 11:28:09PM -0800, cbarratt at wrote:
> > I've not heard from you on the adaptive checksum length patch.
> > I shall be committing it shortly subject to objections or
> > further discussion.
> Sorry, I've been extremely busy (
> I've been following the discussion and the patch looks good.
> > I would like to see the MD4 checksums fixed as well.  We are
> > very close to the upper limit on protocol versions for
> > deployed versions of rsync.  Therefore, i would like to
> > minimize protocol increments for a while.  In any other
> > circumstance i wouldn't suggest doing so but i think it
> > would be a good idea to integrate these two fixes in one
> > protocol bump.
> I agree, they should be done together.  I don't have my original
> patch but I can reimplement it with the correct remote_version
> dependence and send it in the next couple of days (by Thursday
> evening).  My intent is the minimal set of changes, rather than
> changing the internals.

That is a workable timeframe, thanks.

	J.W. Schultz            Pegasystems Technologies
	email address:		jw at

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt

More information about the rsync mailing list