[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4322AD07.3040708@heidelbg.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 11:53:11 +0200
From: Christian Karpp <xn@...delbg.ibm.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: 2 Qs on john1.6 (stable)
Solar Designer wrote:
> You might get around this by reducing the compiler's optimization level
> (e.g., replace the -O2 with -O1) for all or for some source files (you
> can compile DES_std.c into DES_std.o invoking cc manually).
Good hint. Unfortunately I have to skip optimization completely under
AIX 5.3 for BSDI DES (x725), Kerberos AFS DES and NT LM DES in order for
the benchmark not to fail. The results however are dramatically lower
than with optimization - on all tests. Pity.
> Alternatively, you may use a John binary off one of the AIX machines
> where it gets compiled correctly.
This is interesting. When running an AIX 5.1 binary under AIX 5.3, I get
slightly lower benchmark results overall. But the tests that failed
before, perform much much better than using the unoptimized binary.
I guess I have to live with that little drawback... :)
BTW, I've used john-1.6.38 this time...
Xn.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
