Closed claudioandre-br closed 2 months ago
$ ../run/john
John the Ripper 1.9.1-dev c5e2455d35 2024-06-10 OMP [linux-gnu 64-bit x86_64 AVX2 AC]
Copyright (c) 1996-2024 by Solar Designer and others
Homepage: https://www.openwall.com/john/
Usage: john [OPTIONS] [PASSWORD-FILES]
Use --help to list all available options.
$ ../run/john --list=build-info
Version: 1.9.1-dev c5e2455d35 2024-06-10
Build: linux-gnu 64-bit x86_64 AVX2 AC OMP OPENCL
SIMD: AVX2, interleaving: MD4:3 MD5:3 SHA1:1 SHA256:1 SHA512:1
CPU tests: AVX2
$JOHN is ../run/
[...]
I deleted and restored the branch.
I'll need to think of what to do with the 3 change logs we have. So far, CHANGES
was for core only, so it's weird to start talking about jumbo in there. I think I'd rather rename it to CHANGES-core
and add a note that it's preserved for historical reasons and that the current one is NEWS
. We also have CHANGES-jumbo
, which I guess we should either update or remove.
I moved the text to RELEASE-NOTES.md
I also added the revert commit [1] just to document the whole process.
[1] We can add a tag to an older commit in git, but, do not merge unless you want to do so.
So, if I got it right, I should use 1.9.1-ce
. Amending the PR.
In reality, the tag is not strictly necessary, but it would be weird not to tag.
Define RELEASE_BUILD and make a short announcement about it.
Some testing is neeeded, but, IMO, this is enough. It is a tarball release.
1.10
is better than1.9
(there are major changes).-dev
is fine. But I'm open to ideais.========== [EDITED] ==========
Still missing something like this: