From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Wherein I argue for the inclusion of libnettle in Emacs 24.5 Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:44:57 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <8761ouebva.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87ha8f3jt1.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87wqhbdnwc.fsf@lifelogs.com> <52F114E7.9000805@cs.ucla.edu> <87iosuenjq.fsf@lifelogs.com> <52F139D3.3030401@cs.ucla.edu> <87a9e6eiyu.fsf@lifelogs.com> <52F15FBB.80005@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1391553920 17986 80.91.229.3 (4 Feb 2014 22:45:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 22:45:20 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 04 23:45:27 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WAok8-00064s-KF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 23:45:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55965 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAok7-000464-3b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:45:23 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59669) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAojz-00044Y-FR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:45:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAoju-0002PO-48 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:45:15 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:40043) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAojt-0002NQ-Oy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:45:09 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WAojr-0005xg-Df for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 23:45:07 +0100 Original-Received: from c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.229.61.72]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 23:45:07 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 23:45:07 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 41 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:2WRcdpCcLtnMs+aBYary8c3EO8E= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:169399 Archived-At: On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 13:46:35 -0800 Paul Eggert wrote: PE> On 02/04/2014 12:11 PM, Ted Zlatanov wrote: >> Well, here's the rejection letter: >> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/163980 >> >> As I said then, feel free to add your vote of support. PE> I don't see his email as rejecting entirely the idea of having Emacs C PE> code invoke GnuTLS functionsthat it doesn't already invoke. It's more PE> that it's a negative (a tighter coupling between Emacs and GnuTLS), PE> that could be overcome by other positives (more functionality that's PE> actually useful). Yes, the thread went on from there (see http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/163906 for the start of it). PE> Do you have some clear and convincing use-cases? That seemed to be PE> his first objection. I wrote plenty in the thread. I got no votes of support and Stefan thought my use cases were too abstract. Now Lars has stated a specific use case, which will perhaps convince more people. PE> For example, would it help the performance of secure-hash considerably PE> if it used the GnuTLS API to do checksums? If we did that in Gnulib, PE> the maintenance overhead to Emacs proper would be essentially zero, PE> and the integration hassles for Emacs users would be no greater than PE> they are now (since Emacs already uses GnuTLS if available). For PE> which real-life use-cases would this help? It could help that libnettle and libhogweed have some well-optimized hashing code. At least MD5 and SHA1 checksums are used all over the place in Emacs packages. But we have our own implementations for those in Emacs, so I don't think hashing makes for a convincing use case. The interesting primitives are HMAC+PBKDF2; the Nettle ciphers applied in CBC, ECB, and CTR modes; and the public key algorithms (RSA, DSA, ECDSA). Those are the building blocks I'd like. Ted