use ripemd160 instead of rmd160 for electron 4.0 uses BoringSSL #26
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks. Have old Node.js versions always supported both aliases? I'm asking to be sure we maintain semver. |
|
@jprichardson From the test result, it works on node 6, 8, 10. |
|
Hi @jprichardson , I've double checked the OpenSSL code, the aliases should exists in OpenSSL v0.9.6 around year 2003. And at least from node 0.7.4 it directly uses function from OpenSSL. We should be fine with this change. |
RyanZim
approved these changes
Feb 9, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We are working on an Electron 4.0 project.
Electron 4.0 uses BoringSSL and removed the alias(
rmd160->ripemd160).We replaced
rmd160withripemd160which works in both OpenSSL and BoringSSL.