[PATCH #14090] md5_process_block() produces incorrect result with large block sizes

[Andreas Jaeger]

On 05/24/2012 06:22 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 05/24/2012 08:11 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>> Ping, what should be done with these two patches?
>
> Your email had just one patch, which unfortunately
> was incorrect because it has no effect even on hypothetical
> hosts with 128-bit size_t, as its expression
> ((uint64_t) len>>   63>>   1) is always zero.
>
> I just now attached a corrected sha512.c patch to
> the report for bug#14090.  The two non-obsolete patches that
> are now attached to that bug report should both
> be applied, though I hope somebody can test them
> first -- I haven't even compiled them, much less
> tested them.

I'm asking for both patches - the initial one contains your patch and 
was tested successfully by me,

Andreas
-- 
  Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
   SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
    GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
     GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126