[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-crypto
Subject:    Re: Int Crypto Patch and FreeS/Wan
From:       Gisle S{lensminde <gisle () ii ! uib ! no>
Date:       2000-11-02 22:40:06
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, William Ahern wrote:

> On Friday 27 October 2000 00:56, you wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, William Ahern wrote:
> > > I have the 2.2.17 kernel, 2.2.17.9 international kernel patch and
> > > frees/wan 1.6. any tips on how to get it to compile? DES, MD5 and SHA1
> > > routines seems to be conflicting. everything compiles fine until it hits
> > > these....
> > >
> > > i ran the freeswan-import script.... no beans....
> >
> > Could you please tell which symboles that are conflicting. It
> > would make it easier to find the problem and/or fix problems
> > in kerneli.
> 
> I've compiled w/ freeswan and the crypto patch, seperately. freeswan won't 
> patch w/ the crypto patch already in, but the crypto patch will take after 
> the freeswan patch. here are the compile errors:

I think the problem simply is that freeswan and kerneli use the same
names of functions and types. This is not surprising, since both have
used the most obvious names. 

This could be solved by one or both the following ways:

1. Kerneli stops exporting these symbols, and let all export happen
   through the cipher_implementation struct. This is allerady discussed on
   this list, and will not break any existing code AFAIK. There are
   already a patch for this submitted to this list, but is not in the
   kerneli patch yet.

2. Modify freeswan to use the crypto API.


1. is the quick soulution, while 2. is a more long-term goal IMHO.
They don't exclude each other, so both can be applied. We could of
cause start that process right now, but the problem is that freeswan
have faster implementations of 3DES, which is used for encryption,
and that implementation has a licence that is problemetic for
kerneli. A faster 3DES should therefore be implemented first.


--
Gisle Sælensminde ( gisle@ii.uib.no )   

With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going
to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead. (from RFC 1925)



Linux-crypto:  cryptography in and on the Linux system
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-crypto/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]