- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
All Stories
Dec 23 2020
In T5189#140595, @gniibe wrote:Please note that many error messages are defined in: https://dev.gnupg.org/source/libgpg-error/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
and https://dev.gnupg.org/source/gnupg/browse/master/po/zh_CN.poSorry, in case you already know that.
May I ask that how to get a new complete clean po file.
I'm not familiar with gettext.
The old one is confusing, and I think maybe I should completely clean the messy.
Really a big project.
Frankly, I more or less forgot about these help files. The German version for sure needs an update as weel.
In T5189#140595, @gniibe wrote:Please note that many error messages are defined in: https://dev.gnupg.org/source/libgpg-error/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
and https://dev.gnupg.org/source/gnupg/browse/master/po/zh_CN.poSorry, in case you already know that.
In T5189#140594, @gniibe wrote:For D515, I will also apply it to master.
Before that, I'd like to confirm an editorial change of mine:
- Remove an extra space before new line (two places)
Please and thanks, I imitated the English edition format :-)
- Remove a comment for use case of the file
- If needed, we could have support of another locale(s) with Chinese language: zh_HK, zh_SG, etc.
- It is not us, but it's users who decide which locale is better for them
- E.g., my friend in Düsseldorf uses ja_JP locale
- So, it's technically better not to address restriction in a translation
for that, I think you best keep that.
Use a locale to distinguish Chinese users always cause problems.
There isn't a big difference between the written language. And small region always lack translations.
Singapore's users who use simplified Chinese always use zh_CN if there is no a specific zh_SG.
And the traditional Chinese users from HK SAR and MC SAR sometimes use the translation for Taiwan Province.
So when translate it, the tip remiand you must consider all the users from anywhere.
Please note that many error messages are defined in: https://dev.gnupg.org/source/libgpg-error/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
and https://dev.gnupg.org/source/gnupg/browse/master/po/zh_CN.po
For D515, I will also apply it to master.
Thank you for your review!
:-)
And how to mark this revision passed?
Applied D514 to master, with an editorial change (removing extra space before newline).
Already have set another, thanks gnibe! See ya!
Please change your passphrase for your card, BTW.
Good. The error recovery worked well.
Dec 22 2020
Applied to s390x optimizations feature branch:
https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=libgcrypt.git;a=commit;h=7532e27cacb74c92fd561524a0897163b0fcd7f4
Applied to s390x optimizations feature branch:
SHA256: https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=libgcrypt.git;a=commit;h=0b555c3cc7c2b80ec2628685946a6139a1996911
SHA512: https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=libgcrypt.git;a=commit;h=45f0ec0c4e3b08627cbf7e65f5f110c321710d01
Applied to s390x optimizations feature branch:
https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=libgcrypt.git;a=commit;h=88570515b4ca92a44c4e40c31f877c11cc00ab68
Applied to s390x optimizations feature branch:
https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=libgcrypt.git;a=commit;h=5aeb091f911398217b2e9facb9bdeb05c63d7844
Applied to s390x optimizations feature branch:
https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=libgcrypt.git;a=commit;h=9219d9d1b60c01a4c7dbde05ee6b5b52e0d7d072
$ gpg --card-status $ gpgconf --kill scdaemon $ git fetch << (Used my PIN, I have reverted to my previous code other day, is not anymore 123456)
In Chinese, “密钥” make a general reference to secret keys, public keys and key-pairs, it has a broad meaning.
Implemented stitched ChaCha20-Poly1305 (vector ChaCha20 & ALU Poly1305). Unfortunately performance is less than OpenSSL (vector ChaCha20 & vector Poly1305). Instruction latencies make Poly1305 slower than combined OpenSSL ChaCha20+Poly1305, thus it is not possible to reach same performance with stitching. Vector Poly1305 implementation is therefore needed.
Currently have 8 block parallel implementation done. Need to check if 6 block parallel approach is better (as used in OpenSSL - benefit being less register pressure and less moving of data between registers and stack).
Thanks for reporting this. You are correct, those HWCAP2_SHA1 and HWCAP2_SHA2 defines are wrong.
Translation of "key" is difficult in our context of public key cryptography.
In many case "key" just refers public key, but for key generation, it means key pair.
Granted I'm not familiar with the functions and it may not be applicable, but the DNS resolver functions in the GNU C Library have semi-recently gained parameters (RES_USE_DNSSEC) to check for DNSSEC validation IIRC. Recent versions of glibc also don't trust the 'ad' bit unless an indication of its trustworthiness is set in /etc/resolv.conf, say if using a local validating resolver, so one can be sure that it's trustworthy. It also appears musl libc may support this.
Dec 21 2020
Thanks, appreciated.
You are lucky. The report came just in time for the 2.2.26 released. Not mentioned over thre but anyway fixed. See T5153
See T5192 for an updated release.
This is x86_64 (amd64) Fedora Linux version 32 (nothing to do with the x32 sorta-architecture).
Oh well, sshfs.
Just for reference what OS and file system is this? It looks like some x32 Linux.
also update doc/help.zh_TW.txt by the way
D515: update gnupg doc/help.zh_TW.txt
Yes, that worked. Thanks for the tip and sorry for the noise ;-)
upload the v2 patch and create a revision
D514: update gnupg doc/help.zh_CN.txt
waiting for review
:-)
GnuPG uses the systems locale.
Please not that you can use this interface: https://dev.gnupg.org/differential/
I think that it is better when you update your patch. You can just refer a patch from this task by: