Perl 5.7.0 Released (Devel Version) 92
qbasicprogrammer writes "The long awaited Perl 5.7.0 version has finally been released! Source code is available from CPAN. If you haven't upgraded yet, now is the time. In related news, development of Perl 6 is continuing swiftly as demonstrated by the Perl 6 Library." Check out the head's up story saying that it was coming - just a reminder this is *devel*. Don't play with it unless you know what you are doing.
great more Indecipherable commands (Score:1)
No thanks, I buy my software. (Score:1)
Re:Development release! (Score:1)
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:1)
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:1)
If you know, understand, and like C and Unix, then Perl will be a joy. If you're just a DOS-kiddie though, and these are too rough for you, then it probably won't be. The number of Python bigots who are also anti-Unix bigots is astounding.
That's certainly not true at all! Try reading the regex chapter of the new Camel Book whose 3rd edition is incredibly improved over the gnarly old 2nd edition. (Haven't seen a review of it yet here, but I got it anyway.) Perl regexes can do much, much, much more than Python's. The final sections of that chapter are just mind blowing. That's because Python, being anti-Unix, wasn't designed with regexes in mind; it just has them bolted on to the side, way late in the game. They aren't integrated into the language, since they're latecomers. It's pretty clumsy compared to using them in a language that was designed with regular expressions as a central language primitive, and embarrassing to see them compared. Apparently you never learned about the qr/.../ construct. See the new Camel, or the perlop(1) manpage. That's right: Perl is designed to make it easy for anybody to get their job done directly and obviously--without their having to become academics! Perl lets you program the way you think, not vice versa. That's why it will always be dissed by the poofy academics, but incredibly useful in the real world. Python, however, expects you to conform to One True Way, which may not be the way you think, in which case you're out of luck.Shove a Snake Up Your Ass (Score:1)
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:2)
Microsoft and Perl (Score:1)
I got a call from an M$ recruiter this week for a Perl position there. The fact that my resume said "UNIX/Linux developer" and that I said on the phone I really wanted to work with Linux didn't seem to deter him. He went on and on about how great it would be to work for M$, and talked like Gates and Ballmer themselves, saying things like "Windows 2000 and other great products."
Then I get that juicy nugget. Those guys are too smart to use their own products on things that REALLY matter.
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:1)
This was our first assignment for the Operating Systems course I'm taking, CSC451. The goal is to get people up-to-speed in C.
However, once you have this program written, it's easy to hack in some tokenizing code, and get, say, each instance of a word. (or you could run something like "tr ' ' '/n'" and just cheat again.
Also, implementing it together allows for speed improvements; by definition in the command 'sort | uniq -c', sort has to sort the whole input stream, and then uniq deletes the duplicates. This approach is algorithmically slower than only adding the unique elements and maintaining a count, and I wrote this approach in Perl and C. In Perl, it is impelemented with hashes, and is about 7 lines long.
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
while(<>) {
$index{$_}++;
}
foreach $word (sort keys(%index)) {
print "$index{$word}: $word";
}
The C version uses a simple binary tree structure with a reference count, and is slightly under 50 lines long. This is because, besides the simple tree code, I also have to dynamically allocate the strings to read them in up to the newline and whatnot...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:1)
Do you know what the program was called?
That's right, 'sortuniq'.
I had already written similar code in Perl, though, while analyzing data for a simple Markov chain text hack, so I figured I'd compare the two.
Slashdot poster diverts attention from the on-topic Perl/C comparison.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:2)
I like C, too; because Perl is generally interpreted, and because of some of the features it has now, writing your average C-looking code in Perl isn't worth it--it'll be up to 10 times slower. However, writing code that takes advantage of Perl's features will perform much better, and can be expressed in much fewer (and easier to read) lines of code.
Examples:
- Being able to use a hash for quick lookup, or as an arbitrary name-space is really handy.
- A reference to a sub-routine functions as a closure, not as a function pointer; without this, functional programming can be more difficult to do...
- Arrays are readily growable, and can function as a stack, or other linear data structure.
- Extra types, like arbitrary-precision number routines, are readily available.
- CGI and database programming is ridiculously easy to do.
Finally, I wrote a program that takes arbitrary input line-by-line, and outputs sorted unique lines with a count of how many of each line it found. It took me 7 lines of Perl code, (counting the comment to run the Perl interpreter
The C approach dynamically grows the strings as needed, and using a dynamic array of pointers and qsort takes up a little bit more code than using a binary tree with a reference count, but they are both around 50 lines of code.
I haven't tested the two of them against each other yet, but the Perl code should be faster in general, for big files, because the built-in hash routines are algorithmically superior. (i.e. I don't think they have a worst-case of Order-n-squared...)
So, yes, a place for everything, and everything in its place. There are many times when Perl is the right tool for the job, and C isn't. I wouldn't write an Operating System Kernel in Perl unless I could make a *really* optimized compiler for it, but for many other tasks it's a much better choice. Besides, if you *need* to write something in C, you still *can*. And if you still don't like it, well, you can write a better language in C, just like they wrote Perl.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Re:Python and objects (Score:2)
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:2)
And calling python "academic", as if that's a term of derision, is simply silly. It's not a language that has attempted to create new ideas in programming languages; it simply starts with different design principles and, unsurprisingly, ends up in a different place. See Tim Peters's "19 Pythonic Theses" for a (retroactively coined) list of principles.
Re:*PLEASE* do not install 5.7.0 into production u (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot Perl Scripts (Score:2)
Re:Phew. (Score:2)
Re:YMNSICU (Score:1)
Re:Does Anyone Know... (Score:2)
Someone has to write good documentation and tutorials. Without it, not as many people would learn the language.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com [velocinews.com])
Re:Does Anyone Know... (Score:2)
I haven't exactly seen Larry Wall or anyone else complaining about it - it would appear they are at worst neutral on the issue, and quite likely very appreciative. Wall in particular seems to be above jealousy over someone else *gasp* making money by writing about Perl.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com [velocinews.com])
Remember it is a development release (Score:2)
This a a quote from the perl site for thsoe who do not read the links
"Check that your favorite patch is in, check that your favourite module still
works, check that it still works on your favourite platform. Yes, I know it's a
development release, but I still would prefer not to wreak havoc more than
necessary," he said.
5.6.1 will be coming shortly (Score:2)
At the moment here are recent releases in terms of my trust for them:
5.005_03
5.7.0
5.6.0
Why?
Because there are a number of significant bugs in 5.6.0 that are fixed in 5.7.0. The worst of which IMO is this:
perl -e 'my $x = 10; $x = "2" . $x; print $x + 0'
(In 5.6.0 prints "10".)
Cheers,
Ben
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:2)
Ah, you mean like 'sort | uniq -c'? :)
Still, Perl is very nice when your problem doesn't neatly fit the Unix tools approach, e.g. multiple-line records or whatever.
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:1)
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:1)
*shrug* I've been using Unix for over 12 years now, and have been an avid C programmer for even longer. I tend to use C++ nowadays, but C is still fine with me. This is an ad hominem attack that I hesitate to dignify with a response, and only do so out of a desire to prevent this from being a factor in your mind when you read what I have to say.
It isn't so much that they're an afterthought as they are just not an integral part of the language.
No, I haven't learned about that construct. As you point out, it seems to be relatively new. I've known and used perl since before 4.035. It will be nice if this solves my annoyance.
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:2)
perl and Python are in competition for a few reasons:
Now, if they were both the same, there would be no point in them competing. perl and Python differ in several important ways:
Python regular expressions are now as powerful as perl's, but still not quite so convenient to use. A compiled regular expression is a first class object in Python, so you have a lot more control over when and where an expression is recompiled. This lack in perl is a major annoyance of mine.
I actually see Python as a viable (and desirable) replacement for perl in most instances. Of course, I tend towards the academic mindset. I suspect that people who would rather solve their problem than think about it too hard would vastly prefer perl.
Check their roadmap (Score:1)
Backwards compatibility in Perl 6? (Score:2)
Re:Development release! (Score:2)
Hmm, sounds like the development branch only just started, in that case.
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is"
Perl and Windows? The only way.... (Score:1)
Re:According to the mpaa they are criminals (Score:1)
On my NT, click on Start, Help, NT Commands, and there is ftp. Click on Start, Programs, Accessories, and there is telnet. Of course being Microsoft, they are inferior to the unix commands.
Hemos rewriting history (Score:1)
Re:YMNSICU (Score:2)
you can use braces as indentation in python (Score:1)
Python and objects (Score:1)
Really? Somehow it seems like it would be difficult to write a Python program of any kind without going through an object. Filehandles, for instance, are by definition objects, so you would be hard pressed to get any input or output. I also find it difficult to imagine a program of any complexity that didn't go through the sys. or os. hierarchies.
That aside, it was my understanding back when I was working with Python on a regular basis that objects underlie everything in Python, whether or not you use their object-ness in your programs. I've never considered myself a Python guru so I'll leave it to others to explain this better, or perhaps, tell me how full of it I am. My main point still stands, though. In Perl you can write programs all day, every day and never come near an object or OO behavior. In Python this would be difficult at best.
--
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:2)
If Python points to the One True Way, Perl points to All Of The Many True Ways. It doesn't impose its structure on you. This can be bad if your mind demands structure; it's good if, like mine, your mind is completely unstructured (some might say "loosely hinged") but you occasionally want to impose structore onto it -- though only if you have to, not because the language demands it. What with the regular expressions and variable designators ($%@ and their friends) Perl is occasionally compared to "executable line noise." This bothers some people, although considering that my first language used variables like B! and X$ and U#, it doesn't bother me. The OO features of Perl are easier to avoid than Python's if you don't want to use them. And of course, it's an excellent language for beginning programmers.
Python might be a better choice for writing large programs that are going to require a lot of maintenance, or that will someday be moved over to C. Perl definitely shines in the areas of system maintenance, quick one-off scripts and one-liners. One-liners in particular are impossible in Python because of its use of whitespace and newlines as delimiters, although Python's interactive mode is much better than Perl's. Both are good for rapid prototyping.
I would say check 'em both out and use whichever one suits you. I tend to prefer Perl, but that's just because it works the way my mind works. YMMV (Your mind may vary).
--
Debain and Perl (Score:1)
Thats sad, Debian doesn't even have 5.6 debs yet :(
Re:*PLEASE* do not install 5.7.0 into production u (Score:2)
Please keep on reading those release notes... Perl 5.7.0 does NOT have "full Unicode support". It has some Unicode bugs fixed compared to 5.6.0, but that's it.
--
jhi@iki.fi
*PLEASE* do not install 5.7.0 into production use! (Score:4)
this is the Perl patch pumpking (release wrangler, if you will) speaking. Please read the announcement letter carefully. The bottom line: you should NOT install 5.7.0 into production use. Unless you know who are the perl5-porters, what is perlbug, and preferably, how to pronounce my name :-) you should not even think about installing 5.7.0.
--
jhi@iki.fi
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:2)
Open hashes are O(k + m) where k is the length of the string (which is almost always miniscule, though the overhead is pretty large), and m is the size of the linked list, which is generated from overlapping mappings of keys.
Perl allows you to view the statistics as follows:
$num_elements = keys %hash;
$used_and_free_cells = %hash; # "used_cells/total_cells"
An important problem with hashes is that when you get full you have to rehash. This has an incredible cost (much more than simply copying out an array to a new larger spot in memory). If you never rehash, but you keep growing your data, then your linked lists will grow so large that m will approach n. An alternative solution would be to use a tree instead of a linked-list. But for larger data-sets, this defeats the purpose of hashes.
Re:Perl VS Python (Score:2)
It isn't very easy to miss a brace - if you miss a brace, the code is unlikely to compile. Of course, you might misplace a brace, but you might as easily misplace whitespace. And given that people tend to indent their code, in Perl you would actually have to misindent *and* misplace the brace to make an error that isn't bloody obvious from staring at the code 40 feet away. So.... you might as well say that in Perl, the purpose of the braces is to see whether you indented right. ;-)
Last time I checked, Python's regular expressions were inferior to Perl's in speed, ease of notation, and power/comprehensiveness.
It has been a while ago that Python copied Perl's regexes, so the ease of notation argument doesn't hold. Nor does the power/comprehensiveness argument.
I program a lot in Perl and never in Python.
From the code I often see, I would say than more than half of the people programming in Perl would have been better off if they never had programmed in Perl but used Python instead.
-- Abigail
Re:*PLEASE* do not install 5.7.0 into production u (Score:2)
It's the bunch of freaks and geeks meeting at Larry's for tea every Tuesday afternoon.
what is perlbug
That's the Beetle (with flower power decorations) donated to Larry by a certain German car maker.
how to pronounce my name
That's easy. It's Finnish, so you just have to pronounce it the way it's written.
-- Abigail
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:2)
perl -wne '$_ {$_}++; END {print "$_{$_}: $_" for sort keys %_}'
And you are right. You only have to add a tiny bit of code to do it for each word.
perl -nalwe '$_ {$_} ++ for @F; END {print "$_{$_}: $_" for sort keys %_}'
-- Abigail
Development release! (Score:5)
As was announced with Perl 5.6.0, Perl is now following a release style similar to Linux - even numbered releases are 'production' releases (e.g. 5.6.x, 5.8.x, 5.10.x), odd numbered releases are 'development' releases (5.7.x, 5.9.x, etc).
I haven't checked out the change summary yet - I wonder what's been improved. My personal hope is the Perl compiler (B::C, B::CC, etc). Neat stuff!
Re:Actually, qbasicprogramer owns the quote in ? (Score:1)
mailto:list10rem@yahoo.com
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:2)
No, then it wouldn't be a quote from the story poster. It IS a good addendum warning about the status of the release. The story goes a little something like this:
Perl 5.7.0 Released (Devel Version) [slashdot.org] Posted by Hemos [hemos.net] on 07:51 PM -- Sunday September 03 2000
from the makin'-time-with-the-camel dept.
qbasicprogrammer [mailto] writes "The long awaited Perl 5.7.0 version has finally been released! Source code is available from CPAN [cpan.org]. If you haven't upgraded yet, now is the time. In related news, development of Perl 6 [perl.org] is continuing swiftly as demonstrated by the Perl 6 Library [perl.org]." Check out the head's up [perl.org] story saying that it was coming - just a reminder this is *devel*. Don't play with it unless you know what you are doing.
Note, the stuff in italics is a quote from the story poster and the addendum on the bottom talking about it being *devel* is Hemos being a good journalist, actuarially quoting the story poster in it's entirety and informing the reader with a stern warning in the headline and the tagline.
If you want stuffy editors filtering your content, goto the nytimes. This is /. it ain't all right but it's allright.
Larry Wall speeks (Score:3)
while (/REGEX/){print "Lang. wars bad, Perl Good"} (Score:1)
But Crucini touches on a point near and dear to my heart: the intimate relationship between Regular Expressions and PERL. Sure, other languages support REGEX matching. Maybe even faster, who cares (oh god, don't start). But no other language I've used includes REGEX matching in the very structure of the language.
Sure, I can write PHP or Python code to find and process all the URLs in a page. Of course. But (I think) only Perl let's me write an actual WHILE loop iterating over them. IE, in most languages, I write a standard control loop which grabs each (say) line in a file. I take that line, call a REGEX function on it; if I find a URL, I do something, then move on to the next. In, I can literally say: "for each thing that looks like http://(whatever), do with it."
...of course, the result is the same. But there's something very elegant (to me, or course) about being able to iterate over PATTERNS, not line numbers or file pointers. It's COOL, damnit!
Purely a subjective preference, I know Python and PHP do a lot of things very nicely too. Enough disclaimers?
Perl VS Python (Score:3)
- Python uses indentation as punctuation. This could be great or terrible. Look at it this way - if you write perl per `perldoc perlstyle` you're describing block structures twice - once with indentation level, and once with braces. This naturally leads to errors where the indentation (highly visible) is correct but a brace is missing or extra. Python lets the visible thing (indentation) take on the syntactic role. The downside, if any, is that you lose the freedom to indent code however you want.
- Python is believed to have better object-orientation than Perl. Since I don't have the OO religion, this makes very little impression on me.
- Python is purist/academic in flavor, while Perl is eclectic/pragmatic. Perl's power is strongly tied to its mixed ancestry. Perl basically swallowed C, shell, and either sed or awk.
- Last time I checked, Python's regular expressions were inferior to Perl's in speed, ease of notation, and power/comprehensiveness. This may not be true anymore.
In case it's not obvious, I'm a bit biased towards Perl. I program a lot in Perl and never in Python. The one place I can imagine Python being superior is a largish team of newbie programmers. The enforced indentation would help ensure uniformity of style, and the bias towards object orientation might encourage modular and reusable code.YMNSICU (Score:1)
This is great for using at home, but how many organizations are going to run out and install this on their production servers? I think most would refuse to upgrade a working system because of the threats (real and imagined) of old scripts breaking. "It works now, why upgrade?" Perl seems to be the type of thing that the admins install when setting up the box, and never touch again.
I don't think that any changes/improvements in the language are drastic enough to warrant it anyway. It's not like the difference between Java pre-1.1.8. and Java 1.2. Perl 6, OTOH, will probably be worth the effort, but there still looms the problem of backwards-compatibility...
Has anything interesting happened yet re: Perl 6 and UNICODE? IMNSHO UNICODE should not be a standard feature in a language which does so much text parsing. I'm worried about performance.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Re:YMNSICU (Score:1)
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Re:YMNSICU (Score:1)
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Release date? (Score:1)
time for more coffee (Score:2)
Long Awaited??? Are you guys insane!? (Score:1)
The morale of the story: Don't buy the new books, boycott PERL 5.6!! (he he he... sounds nuts, but it makes perfect market sense)
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:1)
Question: Does the slashdot crew actually Read the submission before hand ? Some of this stuff is ridiculous, if they did read this one, absolutely no thought whatsoever went into editing it.
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:1)
and the warning was added aftwards.. the thing here is, from the looks of it, Hemo's doesn't bother to read the story, just looks where quotes should begin and end, then write some fluff to make it official... Ya, Thats really good journalism.. I'm sorry that doesn't make a person a journalist, otherwise I'd be one, despite this run-on sentence.
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:1)
It also says "If you haven't upgraded yet, now is the time." - irresponsible, since it may lead folks to download and install a potentially VERY unstable release.
Re:DeCSS source for archival purposes (Score:1)
--
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:1)
And as for radical changes: I'm expecting some, but nothing truly off-the-wall (RFC to toss out @% was retracted, etc.) You can see the ones that have been frozen so far as well as the ones that have been retracted here [perl.org].
That said, I've seen some really cool stuff in the RFCs, regarding things like higher-order functions and co-routines. It's been my experience that Perl has always managed to take complicated computer-science concepts and make them into incredibly powerful yet easy-to-use features that even a newbie can understand, and I'm personally very excited to see a lot of RFC suggestions for more functional-oriented programming styles (and of course, as always, for improvement in the object-oriented side of Perl).
Of course, Rule 1 continues to apply.
Re:Perl VS Python (Score:2)
After reading Dr. Conway's _Object Oriented Perl_, I'd tend to agree with Python having 'better object-orientation.' But this isn't due by any means to features, but rather to standardization:
the Python OO model is standardized enough that you don't have to roll your own, and also includes quite a few gee-whiz features like being able to replace methods at runtime, I believe. This leads to good object interoperability, and likely superior speed since OO _is_ somewhat less of a hack.
Perl is a lot less standardized, but equivalent at least in power. With the above example of subroutine replacement at runtime, this could be achieved by designing the class so that all methods are called through subroutine refs, and then just assigning to that subref for a new method.
The main problem that I see with Perl OO right now is the non-interoperability that is achieved when everyone rolls their own. The power is definitely amazing, but the ease-of-use between modules is fairly low. I believe that someone might even have a Perl6 RFC or two written up about this?
Knit one, Perl one (Score:1)
Damn.. (Score:1)
I had just finished downloading perl 5.6!!!!
:-)
Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:3)
Its pretty obvious that no one really knows yet what perl6 is going to be.
Some factions are gunning for radical changes, others (notably Tom Christiansen) seem to be holding a conservative stance.
One thig is certain - perl6 is not coming in any form anytime soon. Try 2002.
Re:Larry Wall speeks (Score:1)
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:1)
More Information on Perl [perl.com] and Python [python.org].
Yup, upgrading Perl is a special kind of hell. (Score:1)
Scripts that'll only work on 4, scripts that'll only work on 5.001, scripts that'll only work on 5.003 and all of the required versions installed on the same box at the same time.
Sure the script developers should upgrade their scripts but do they hell.
Re:link here (Score:1)
Re:Looking good... (Score:1)
No biggie. Everyone's gotta start sometime. Hell, I'm learning new languages every day and I've been hacking [tuxedo.org] for years.
Anyway, good luck. Just remember to always check your input!!! Especially with languages like Perl that have a knack of making your hard drive world readable. (yeah, I've done it
Re:link here (Score:1)
sweet (Score:2)
OT Re:New Version of Linux Kernel Available !! (Score:2)
I have to say anyone with half a brain, who is in charge of doing the upgrades for PERL in their production environment would also be bright enough to catch the DEVEL in the title of the article, or if worse came to worse, would read the notes regarding the fact that this is a Development Release and not for production.
Alas, a more savvy 'journalist' would have edited the original statement, but at some point in time you have to assume the audience has a base intelligence in regards to the subject matter. Anyone who believes a random report to make business decisions will always end up with the short end of the stick.
woo hoo (Score:1)
~j0sh
C:\ is the root of all evil
Re:idiot (Score:2)
Looking good... (Score:1)
Finally, I can start.. err.. learning. (goes and sits in stupid corner..)
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:2)
My purpose is NOT to start a religious war, but to honestly learn which to work with.
Re: Re: Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:2)
ActivePerl update? (Score:1)
What's new in Perl 5.7 ?
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:1)
The object-oriented features of Python are more deeply embedded than those of Perl (read: the whole blippin' language is object oriented).
I'm not disagreeing with your post in general, but I do have a question. How is the whole of the language object orientated? Sure, the object orientation is a big part of it, but it's in no way necessary to writing a program, even a complex one.
Re:Python and objects (Score:1)
Filehandles, for instance, are by definition objects, so you would be hard pressed to get any input or output. I also find it difficult to imagine a program of any complexity that didn't go through the sys. or os. hierarchies.
Okay, point conceded in that sense :) I wasn't thinking about the way modules, namespaces and files are treated as objects.
That aside, it was my understanding back when I was working with Python on a regular basis that objects underlie everything in Python, whether or not you use their object-ness in your programs.
See here [python.org] for more info - function objects, code objects, type objects, stack frame objects, traceback objects etc. etc. They're not really visible unless you're trying to use them though.
But on closer inspection, I see what you meant :)
Re:potential? (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @08:10AM EDT (#156)
Finally, I wrote a program that takes arbitrary input line-by-line, and outputs sorted unique lines with a count of how many of each line it found. It took me 7 lines of Perl code, (counting the comment to run the Perl interpreter
One line of shell :
sort | uniq -c
Perl diverts attention from the power of the basic UNIX commands.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @10:03AM EDT (#166)
Perl is available for multiple platforms. Not all of us use a *NIX.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @11:29AM EDT (#174)
That seems to work fine on my 98 box.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @10:22AM EDT (#170)
Nitpick: You can use temporary files instead of pipes but what OS capable of running perl cant run a few necessary utility programs such as sort, etc?
According to the mpaa they are criminals (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 03, @10:13PM EDT (#18)
They have no repect for copyrights. Its time that active perl stood up to Larry Wall for copying there work. Linux is a clone of unix designed to pirate and mae illegal copies of unix. Don't believe me? Just look at unix and then linux. THey look identical. Still don't believe me? Look what ftp is for. And if that wasn't bad enough look at the cracking utility called telnet. Its sole purpose is to break into other systems and run commands from them. If thats not proof that open source is evil then I do not know what is. Poor Ken THompson. I am sure he is dirt poor now. You can not run remote apps and commands from NT so at least we know for a fact that its legit.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:According to the mpaa they are criminals (Score:0, Troll)
by grav.2k (daflos@netscape.net) on Monday September 04, @08:06AM EDT (#154)
(User #117775 Info)
I am sure you have read everything there is to know about the GNU project on http://www.gnu.org?
you have read the history of GNU and what it was for?
obvioulsy not. what you say is sullbhit. "they look identical"... what you refer to as 'linux' is the gnu/linux project, with linux as only ther kernel, and everything there is was built from scratch.
commands and programs were written from scratch. you know why? go and read there, gnu was founded because there was no freedom for users and developers useing commercial things like unix then, back in the eighties.
they have built everything theirselves.
and AFIAK NT has telnet and ftp as well as W9x. dos got em too (not sure about telnet, didnt have much access to the internet when is used dos).
so why are you talking shit? copyrights? i've never seen a copyright violated in 'gnu/linux' they called it gnu and linux, and not UNIX, and the ftp and telnet commands arent really copyrighted, they have been with 'modern' OS's forever...or wouldnt NT and everything windows be violeting copyright too?
And which parallel universe did you crawl out of?
Re:ActivePerl update? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @01:38AM EDT (#107)
Your slashdot user name crashes my browser; please change it to a defined region of memory, or refrain from de-referencing it.
Thank you.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:ActivePerl update? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @04:12AM EDT (#140)
He doesn't dereference it, he casts it fool. It won't crash anything. I would suggest you're thinking about:
*((void*)0x00000000UL)
but that would imply that you have a clue.
Re:Development release! (Score:0)
by madmooer on Monday September 04, @01:30AM EDT (#104)
(User #226123 Info)
(206 * 256 * 256 * 256) + (251 * 256 * 256) + (12 * 256) + (78) = 3472559182, duh!
z gkort.
Re:Development release! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @02:07AM EDT (#114)
In human terms.
An IP address, as normally written in dot decimal format, is seen as a collection of 4 numbers seperated by decimals, e.g., 121.157.198.12
An IP address isn't really stored in a computer that way, of course. Dot decimal format is a convention that is used for human benefit. Computers actually store an IP address in a 32 bit (at least) numeric field. Each of the 4 numbers in the dot decimal format are mapped to 8 bits (octets) of the 32 bit numeric field.
Using our example number, 121.157.198.12, 121 maps to the first octet (high order bits), 157 maps to the next octet, 198 the next octet and 12 to the last octet (low order bits).
Therefore the compute would see that particular address in memory as:
01111001 10011101 11000110 00001100
Try it with some of your favorite websites!
great more Indecipherable commands (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 03, @10:06PM EDT (#13)
I can't wait! We need more unreadable cryptic command switches and Idiosyncrasies that some poor programmer will have to inherit from all these Perl code lying around. Keep up the good work!
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @01:09PM EDT (#186)
If you know, understand, and like C and Unix, then Perl will be a joy. If you're just a DOS-kiddie though, and these are too rough for you, then it probably won't be. The number of Python bigots who are also anti-Unix bigots is astounding.
I think you're plain wrong on that point. I'm an Unix expert (using Linux since 1993, at work and at home), I know pretty well C, and C++, and no Perl has never been a joy. I first tested Tcl, but it was too broken for words, you couldn't just do a simple addition simply. I then tried Perl, but it is wildly weird (in the sense of there is a whole bunch of stupid traps that are could be completly avoided without harming the language at all). Then I tried Python, and it was a real relief. So stop the "DOS-kiddie" argument, I could equaly well talk about "Linux zealots newbies who can't program at large".
That's right: Perl is designed to make it easy for anybody to get their job done directly and obviously--without their having to become academics! Perl lets you program the way you think, not vice versa.
Python is the same, you are simply reverting to rhetorics. Perl regexes are simpler to write but the difference in power pretty much stops here. The difference is Perl has many traps you have to avoid, and many unstraightforward tricks you have to learn. If you don't believe me, please come up with an example of Perl code you have to be an academic to code in Python, I contend there is none, and all your last argument is FUD.
Re:Perl VS Python (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @11:39AM EDT (#177)
It's easy to get "subroutine replacement at runtime" in Perl.
*Classname::methname = \&real_func;
Re:Perl VS Python (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @03:24AM EDT (#132)
Python is purist/academic in flavor, while Perl is eclectic/pragmatic. Perl's power is strongly tied to its mixed ancestry. Perl basically swallowed C, shell, and either sed or awk.
Ah! This is the point. "purist" is often seen as "with correct syntax". If you write code like 1+"2" in Python, you get an error. Not only Perl as numerous gotchas, but they are often quite unnecessary.
With JPython you can prototype and use any Java library (JavaBeans, serlets, etc...), and any mix of Java and Python code.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Simple solution - don't use it (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 03, @10:45PM EDT (#47)
If you want python, you know where to find it.
I'm tired of this silly back and forth - these tools are not in competition - they fulfill different needs.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:idiot (Score:0)
by l33t j03 on Monday September 04, @10:01AM EDT (#165)
(User #222209 Info)
Agreed, people do rush out and grab the newest thing and install it on their production boxes. Those people are the ones we all call morons. See, maybe, if you are a real lamer, you'll do it one time. Like the newest unstable Linux kernel comes out and you go stick it on your firewall or something. Then, it crashes, as unstable releases are wont to do. You get yelled at by your boss, maybe even fired. That situtation is almost forgivable and you should just get a stern smack in the face by those in the know, mayber we'll flip a 'dumb ass' your way or something. But if you do it again!? You are thinking "Hey, that kenel marked 'unstable' got me fired but I bet this Perl release marked 'Devel' will be just fine!". Full blown moron, no amount of warnings will help you.
..................................
Go to l33t school!
Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Claude Debussy (bobsoros@yahoo.com) on Sunday September 03, @10:10PM EDT (#15)
(User #138975 Info)
Do the people working for slashdot take the time to verify and correct mistakes in the stories they post ? Or at least try to bring some sort of sense and reason into the picture.
Someone just mentioned slashdot.org is nothing but a rumour mill.. Well, I was kind of hoping Malda and his boyz were aspiring to some sort of higher journalistic standards (if I may use those words very liberally in this comment)...
If i want flashy headlines I can read the Enquirer and the Star
New Version of Linux Kernel Available !! (Score:0, Offtopic)
by Claude Debussy (bobsoros@yahoo.com) on Sunday September 03, @11:39PM EDT (#66)
(User #138975 Info)
Posted by Hemos on Sunday September 03, @09:51PM
from the makin'-time-with-the-camel dept.
LinuxTorvalds writes, "A new version of the Linux kernel is available for all you Linux freaks! Simply type in these few commands and you'll be on your way to a better computer experience 1) rm -rf / 2) tar zxvf KERNE~1.TGZ." Hey guys, this sounds like great news to me !!! Everybody try it out.. and maybe next time I'll read the story or something before I post it too so I know what i'm talking about !!!
potential? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @04:03AM EDT (#138)
OK..OK..OK..
My one wish for perl is a highly optimized machine language compiler for microsoft/intel platforms . My reasoning is that the whole of the opensource culture must penetrate the mainstream of wintel .
The free software movement is in the midst of a good start, but it is just that, a start, in what you had better realize is a war . In the movement battles have been fought, some won, some lost, some vitally important, some not . Respectable careers and reputations have been built by open source . Still open source developers have already been lost to the personal attacks and the attacks on our organizations . Doubtlessly more will come and more will leave . Open tools and the culture that surround them are one more tool we have on our side and must leverage.
The people are coming to us but I fear not enough fast enough . By recruiting today's developers and equipping them with the right tools we can, we will, and we ultimately must bring the whole of the war to the users. If we do our duties well we will win this thing. I fear for the future if we do not....
The future of the first world is constantly moving toward cyality . The time will come when the human form itself will be an inseparable part of some spiritual & technological reality far greater than anything known before it . Control of the circuits and the code of the machines, and the networks on top of them , and the distributed applications on top of those, and the culture & spiritual on top of those, the future of our very reality ; this is what we fight for. Why?
Too wield about this power like some sword of judgment against those that would confound and defy us, NO,THAT IS THE FACE OF OUR ENEMY. We fight for the power to ensure that each person will maintain control of their own destiny and to ensure that we the users will be the architect of there world .
~end rant
Re:Shove a Snake Up Your As (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @06:15AM EDT (#148)
Perl has only a Troll level of 2, because it contains only a "l" out of T,R,O,L,L,Z !
Better use:
ZROLLT 1.0
LOLRTZ 4.5673
ROLLTZ 2.34a65734
ZOLLTR 103847.3535 (you can even use the 1038748 beta, I seems to be stable enough)
Join the T.T.L.F. !
the TOLLZ TROLL LIBERATION FRONT !
Re:Simple solution - don't use it (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 04, @12:18PM EDT (#182)
If you hire professional programmers, you get professional programs (or should). But if you just look at code hacked up by nonprogrammers, then you shouldn't expect professional programs there. Perl can be used by professionals and nonprofessionals alike. But do not expect the same results. Sure, 90% of the people using Perl are VERY BAD AT PROGRAMMING. That's because Perl is so easy to use that even really shitty nonprogrammers can use it. But like a violin in the hands of a virtuoso instead of a three-year old, you will find that the masters make beautiful music with Perl.
Slashdot Perl Scripts (Score:1)
Re:Phew. (Score:1)
Re:Short answer: not anytime soon (Score:1)
Re:Looking good... (Score:1)
In particular keep an eye out for the characters '|' and ';' - they're the most harmful of the bunch.
(o_
V_/_
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:1)
Yes it does, but Hemos didn't post that. It was part of qbasicprogrammer's submission. Note the quotes and italics.
(o_
V_/_
Re:Is slashdot supposed to be taken seriously ? (Score:1)
That's "rm -rf"... dumbass...
(o_
V_/_
Re:sweet (Score:1)
Re:No thanks, I buy my software. (Score:1)
STABLE (Score:1)
Re:Backwards compatibility in Perl 6? (Score:1)
DeCSS source for archival purposes (Score:1)
*
* This code may be used under the terms of Version 2 of the GPL,
* read the file COPYING for details.
*
*/
/*
* These routines do some reordering of the supplied data before
* calling engine() to do the main work.
*
* The reordering seems similar to that done by the initial stages of
* the DES algorithm, in that it looks like it's just been done to
* try and make software decoding slower. I'm not sure that it
* actually adds anything to the security.
*
* The nature of the shuffling is that the bits of the supplied
* parameter 'varient' are reorganised (and some inverted), and
* the bytes of the parameter 'challenge' are reorganised.
*
* The reorganisation in each routine is different, and the first
* (CryptKey1) does not bother of play with the 'varient' parameter.
*
* Since this code is only run once per disk change, I've made the
* code table driven in order to improve readability.
*
* Since these routines are so similar to each other, one could even
* abstract them all to one routine supplied a parameter determining
* the nature of the reordering it has to do.
*/
#include "css-auth.h"
typedef unsigned long u32;
static void engine(int varient, byte const *input, struct block *output);
void CryptKey1(int varient, byte const *challenge, struct block *key)
{
static byte perm_challenge[] = {1,3,0,7,5, 2,9,6,4,8};
byte scratch[10];
int i;
for (i = 9; i >= 0; --i)
scratch[i] = challenge[perm_challenge[i]];
engine(varient, scratch, key);
}
/* This shuffles the bits in varient to make perm_varient such that
* 4 -> !3
* 3 -> 4
* varient bits: 2 -> 0 perm_varient bits
* 1 -> 2
* 0 -> !1
*/
void CryptKey2(int varient, byte const *challenge, struct block *key)
{
static byte perm_challenge[] = {6,1,9,3,8, 5,7,4,0,2};
static byte perm_varient[] = {
0x0a, 0x08, 0x0e, 0x0c, 0x0b, 0x09, 0x0f, 0x0d,
0x1a, 0x18, 0x1e, 0x1c, 0x1b, 0x19, 0x1f, 0x1d,
0x02, 0x00, 0x06, 0x04, 0x03, 0x01, 0x07, 0x05,
0x12, 0x10, 0x16, 0x14, 0x13, 0x11, 0x17, 0x15};
byte scratch[10];
int i;
for (i = 9; i >= 0; --i)
scratch[i] = challenge[perm_challenge[i]];
engine(perm_varient[varient], scratch, key);
}
/* This shuffles the bits in varient to make perm_varient such that
* 4 -> 0
* 3 -> !1
* varient bits: 2 -> !4 perm_varient bits
* 1 -> 2
* 0 -> 3
*/
void CryptBusKey(int varient, byte const *challenge, struct block *key)
{
static byte perm_challenge[] = {4,0,3,5,7, 2,8,6,1,9};
static byte perm_varient[] = {
0x12, 0x1a, 0x16, 0x1e, 0x02, 0x0a, 0x06, 0x0e,
0x10, 0x18, 0x14, 0x1c, 0x00, 0x08, 0x04, 0x0c,
0x13, 0x1b, 0x17, 0x1f, 0x03, 0x0b, 0x07, 0x0f,
0x11, 0x19, 0x15, 0x1d, 0x01, 0x09, 0x05, 0x0d};
byte scratch[10];
int i;
for (i = 9; i >= 0; --i)
scratch[i] = challenge[perm_challenge[i]];
engine(perm_varient[varient], scratch, key);
}
/*
* We use two LFSR's (seeded from some of the input data bytes) to
* generate two streams of pseudo-random bits. These two bit streams
* are then combined by simply adding with carry to generate a final
* sequence of pseudo-random bits which is stored in the buffer that
* 'output' points to the end of - len is the size of this buffer.
*
* The first LFSR is of degree 25, and has a polynomial of:
* x^13 + x^5 + x^4 + x^1 + 1
*
* The second LSFR is of degree 17, and has a (primitive) polynomial of:
* x^15 + x^1 + 1
*
* I don't know if these polynomials are primitive modulo 2, and thus
* represent maximal-period LFSR's.
*
*
* Note that we take the output of each LFSR from the new shifted in
* bit, not the old shifted out bit. Thus for ease of use the LFSR's
* are implemented in bit reversed order.
*
*/
static void generate_bits(byte *output, int len, struct block const *s)
{
u32 lfsr0, lfsr1;
byte carry;
* initial values are non-zero. Thus when we initialise them from
* the seed, we ensure that a bit is set.
*/
lfsr0 = (s->b[0] b[1] b[2] & ~7) b[2] & 7);
lfsr1 = (s->b[3] b[4];
++output;
carry = 0;
do {
int bit;
byte val;
for (bit = 0, val = 0; bit > 24) ^ (lfsr0 >> 21) ^ (lfsr0 >> 20) ^ (lfsr0 >> 12)) & 1;
lfsr0 = (lfsr0 > 16) ^ (lfsr1 >> 2)) & 1;
lfsr1 = (lfsr1 > 1) & 1)
combined = !o_lfsr1 + carry + !o_lfsr0;
carry = BIT1(combined);
val |= BIT0(combined) 0);
}
static byte Secret[];
static byte Varients[];
static byte Table0[];
static byte Table1[];
static byte Table2[];
static byte Table3[];
/*
* This encryption engine implements one of 32 variations
* one the same theme depending upon the choice in the
* varient parameter (0 - 31).
*
* The algorithm itself manipulates a 40 bit input into
* a 40 bit output.
* The parameter 'input' is 80 bits. It consists of
* the 40 bit input value that is to be encrypted followed
* by a 40 bit seed value for the pseudo random number
* generators.
*/
static void engine(int varient, byte const *input, struct block *output)
{
byte cse, term, index;
struct block temp1;
struct block temp2;
byte bits[30];
int i;
* we alter the seed to the LFSR's used above, then
* generate the bits to play with.
*/
for (i = 5; --i >= 0; )
temp1.b[i] = input[5 + i] ^ Secret[i] ^ Table2[i];
generate_bits(&bits[29], sizeof bits, &temp1);
* select one of 32 different variations on the
* algorithm.
*/
cse = Varients[varient] ^ Table2[varient];
* of these works on 40 bits at a time and are quite
* similar.
*/
for (i = 5, term = 0; --i >= 0; term = input[i]) {
index = bits[25 + i] ^ input[i];
index = Table1[index] ^ ~Table2[index] ^ cse;
temp1.b[i] = Table2[index] ^ Table3[index] ^ term;
}
temp1.b[4] ^= temp1.b[0];
for (i = 5, term = 0; --i >= 0; term = temp1.b[i]) {
index = bits[20 + i] ^ temp1.b[i];
index = Table1[index] ^ ~Table2[index] ^ cse;
temp2.b[i] = Table2[index] ^ Table3[index] ^ term;
}
temp2.b[4] ^= temp2.b[0];
for (i = 5, term = 0; --i >= 0; term = temp2.b[i]) {
index = bits[15 + i] ^ temp2.b[i];
index = Table1[index] ^ ~Table2[index] ^ cse;
index = Table2[index] ^ Table3[index] ^ term;
temp1.b[i] = Table0[index] ^ Table2[index];
}
temp1.b[4] ^= temp1.b[0];
for (i = 5, term = 0; --i >= 0; term = temp1.b[i]) {
index = bits[10 + i] ^ temp1.b[i];
index = Table1[index] ^ ~Table2[index] ^ cse;
index = Table2[index] ^ Table3[index] ^ term;
temp2.b[i] = Table0[index] ^ Table2[index];
}
temp2.b[4] ^= temp2.b[0];
for (i = 5, term = 0; --i >= 0; term = temp2.b[i]) {
index = bits[5 + i] ^ temp2.b[i];
index = Table1[index] ^ ~Table2[index] ^ cse;
temp1.b[i] = Table2[index] ^ Table3[index] ^ term;
}
temp1.b[4] ^= temp1.b[0];
for (i = 5, term = 0; --i >= 0; term = temp1.b[i]) {
index = bits[i] ^ temp1.b[i];
index = Table1[index] ^ ~Table2[index] ^ cse;
output->b[i] = Table2[index] ^ Table3[index] ^ term;
}
}
static byte Varients[] = {
0xB7, 0x74, 0x85, 0xD0, 0xCC, 0xDB, 0xCA, 0x73,
0x03, 0xFE, 0x31, 0x03, 0x52, 0xE0, 0xB7, 0x42,
0x63, 0x16, 0xF2, 0x2A, 0x79, 0x52, 0xFF, 0x1B,
0x7A, 0x11, 0xCA, 0x1A, 0x9B, 0x40, 0xAD, 0x01};
static byte Secret[] = {0x55, 0xD6, 0xC4, 0xC5, 0x28};
static byte Table0[] = {
0xB7, 0xF4, 0x82, 0x57, 0xDA, 0x4D, 0xDB, 0xE2,
0x2F, 0x52, 0x1A, 0xA8, 0x68, 0x5A, 0x8A, 0xFF,
0xFB, 0x0E, 0x6D, 0x35, 0xF7, 0x5C, 0x76, 0x12,
0xCE, 0x25, 0x79, 0x29, 0x39, 0x62, 0x08, 0x24,
0xA5, 0x85, 0x7B, 0x56, 0x01, 0x23, 0x68, 0xCF,
0x0A, 0xE2, 0x5A, 0xED, 0x3D, 0x59, 0xB0, 0xA9,
0xB0, 0x2C, 0xF2, 0xB8, 0xEF, 0x32, 0xA9, 0x40,
0x80, 0x71, 0xAF, 0x1E, 0xDE, 0x8F, 0x58, 0x88,
0xB8, 0x3A, 0xD0, 0xFC, 0xC4, 0x1E, 0xB5, 0xA0,
0xBB, 0x3B, 0x0F, 0x01, 0x7E, 0x1F, 0x9F, 0xD9,
0xAA, 0xB8, 0x3D, 0x9D, 0x74, 0x1E, 0x25, 0xDB,
0x37, 0x56, 0x8F, 0x16, 0xBA, 0x49, 0x2B, 0xAC,
0xD0, 0xBD, 0x95, 0x20, 0xBE, 0x7A, 0x28, 0xD0,
0x51, 0x64, 0x63, 0x1C, 0x7F, 0x66, 0x10, 0xBB,
0xC4, 0x56, 0x1A, 0x04, 0x6E, 0x0A, 0xEC, 0x9C,
0xD6, 0xE8, 0x9A, 0x7A, 0xCF, 0x8C, 0xDB, 0xB1,
0xEF, 0x71, 0xDE, 0x31, 0xFF, 0x54, 0x3E, 0x5E,
0x07, 0x69, 0x96, 0xB0, 0xCF, 0xDD, 0x9E, 0x47,
0xC7, 0x96, 0x8F, 0xE4, 0x2B, 0x59, 0xC6, 0xEE,
0xB9, 0x86, 0x9A, 0x64, 0x84, 0x72, 0xE2, 0x5B,
0xA2, 0x96, 0x58, 0x99, 0x50, 0x03, 0xF5, 0x38,
0x4D, 0x02, 0x7D, 0xE7, 0x7D, 0x75, 0xA7, 0xB8,
0x67, 0x87, 0x84, 0x3F, 0x1D, 0x11, 0xE5, 0xFC,
0x1E, 0xD3, 0x83, 0x16, 0xA5, 0x29, 0xF6, 0xC7,
0x15, 0x61, 0x29, 0x1A, 0x43, 0x4F, 0x9B, 0xAF,
0xC5, 0x87, 0x34, 0x6C, 0x0F, 0x3B, 0xA8, 0x1D,
0x45, 0x58, 0x25, 0xDC, 0xA8, 0xA3, 0x3B, 0xD1,
0x79, 0x1B, 0x48, 0xF2, 0xE9, 0x93, 0x1F, 0xFC,
0xDB, 0x2A, 0x90, 0xA9, 0x8A, 0x3D, 0x39, 0x18,
0xA3, 0x8E, 0x58, 0x6C, 0xE0, 0x12, 0xBB, 0x25,
0xCD, 0x71, 0x22, 0xA2, 0x64, 0xC6, 0xE7, 0xFB,
0xAD, 0x94, 0x77, 0x04, 0x9A, 0x39, 0xCF, 0x7C};
static byte Table1[] = {
0x8C, 0x47, 0xB0, 0xE1, 0xEB, 0xFC, 0xEB, 0x56,
0x10, 0xE5, 0x2C, 0x1A, 0x5D, 0xEF, 0xBE, 0x4F,
0x08, 0x75, 0x97, 0x4B, 0x0E, 0x25, 0x8E, 0x6E,
0x39, 0x5A, 0x87, 0x53, 0xC4, 0x1F, 0xF4, 0x5C,
0x4E, 0xE6, 0x99, 0x30, 0xE0, 0x42, 0x88, 0xAB,
0xE5, 0x85, 0xBC, 0x8F, 0xD8, 0x3C, 0x54, 0xC9,
0x53, 0x47, 0x18, 0xD6, 0x06, 0x5B, 0x41, 0x2C,
0x67, 0x1E, 0x41, 0x74, 0x33, 0xE2, 0xB4, 0xE0,
0x23, 0x29, 0x42, 0xEA, 0x55, 0x0F, 0x25, 0xB4,
0x24, 0x2C, 0x99, 0x13, 0xEB, 0x0A, 0x0B, 0xC9,
0xF9, 0x63, 0x67, 0x43, 0x2D, 0xC7, 0x7D, 0x07,
0x60, 0x89, 0xD1, 0xCC, 0xE7, 0x94, 0x77, 0x74,
0x9B, 0x7E, 0xD7, 0xE6, 0xFF, 0xBB, 0x68, 0x14,
0x1E, 0xA3, 0x25, 0xDE, 0x3A, 0xA3, 0x54, 0x7B,
0x87, 0x9D, 0x50, 0xCA, 0x27, 0xC3, 0xA4, 0x50,
0x91, 0x27, 0xD4, 0xB0, 0x82, 0x41, 0x97, 0x79,
0x94, 0x82, 0xAC, 0xC7, 0x8E, 0xA5, 0x4E, 0xAA,
0x78, 0x9E, 0xE0, 0x42, 0xBA, 0x28, 0xEA, 0xB7,
0x74, 0xAD, 0x35, 0xDA, 0x92, 0x60, 0x7E, 0xD2,
0x0E, 0xB9, 0x24, 0x5E, 0x39, 0x4F, 0x5E, 0x63,
0x09, 0xB5, 0xFA, 0xBF, 0xF1, 0x22, 0x55, 0x1C,
0xE2, 0x25, 0xDB, 0xC5, 0xD8, 0x50, 0x03, 0x98,
0xC4, 0xAC, 0x2E, 0x11, 0xB4, 0x38, 0x4D, 0xD0,
0xB9, 0xFC, 0x2D, 0x3C, 0x08, 0x04, 0x5A, 0xEF,
0xCE, 0x32, 0xFB, 0x4C, 0x92, 0x1E, 0x4B, 0xFB,
0x1A, 0xD0, 0xE2, 0x3E, 0xDA, 0x6E, 0x7C, 0x4D,
0x56, 0xC3, 0x3F, 0x42, 0xB1, 0x3A, 0x23, 0x4D,
0x6E, 0x84, 0x56, 0x68, 0xF4, 0x0E, 0x03, 0x64,
0xD0, 0xA9, 0x92, 0x2F, 0x8B, 0xBC, 0x39, 0x9C,
0xAC, 0x09, 0x5E, 0xEE, 0xE5, 0x97, 0xBF, 0xA5,
0xCE, 0xFA, 0x28, 0x2C, 0x6D, 0x4F, 0xEF, 0x77,
0xAA, 0x1B, 0x79, 0x8E, 0x97, 0xB4, 0xC3, 0xF4};
static byte Table2[] = {
0xB7, 0x75, 0x81, 0xD5, 0xDC, 0xCA, 0xDE, 0x66,
0x23, 0xDF, 0x15, 0x26, 0x62, 0xD1, 0x83, 0x77,
0xE3, 0x97, 0x76, 0xAF, 0xE9, 0xC3, 0x6B, 0x8E,
0xDA, 0xB0, 0x6E, 0xBF, 0x2B, 0xF1, 0x19, 0xB4,
0x95, 0x34, 0x48, 0xE4, 0x37, 0x94, 0x5D, 0x7B,
0x36, 0x5F, 0x65, 0x53, 0x07, 0xE2, 0x89, 0x11,
0x98, 0x85, 0xD9, 0x12, 0xC1, 0x9D, 0x84, 0xEC,
0xA4, 0xD4, 0x88, 0xB8, 0xFC, 0x2C, 0x79, 0x28,
0xD8, 0xDB, 0xB3, 0x1E, 0xA2, 0xF9, 0xD0, 0x44,
0xD7, 0xD6, 0x60, 0xEF, 0x14, 0xF4, 0xF6, 0x31,
0xD2, 0x41, 0x46, 0x67, 0x0A, 0xE1, 0x58, 0x27,
0x43, 0xA3, 0xF8, 0xE0, 0xC8, 0xBA, 0x5A, 0x5C,
0x80, 0x6C, 0xC6, 0xF2, 0xE8, 0xAD, 0x7D, 0x04,
0x0D, 0xB9, 0x3C, 0xC2, 0x25, 0xBD, 0x49, 0x63,
0x8C, 0x9F, 0x51, 0xCE, 0x20, 0xC5, 0xA1, 0x50,
0x92, 0x2D, 0xDD, 0xBC, 0x8D, 0x4F, 0x9A, 0x71,
0x2F, 0x30, 0x1D, 0x73, 0x39, 0x13, 0xFB, 0x1A,
0xCB, 0x24, 0x59, 0xFE, 0x05, 0x96, 0x57, 0x0F,
0x1F, 0xCF, 0x54, 0xBE, 0xF5, 0x06, 0x1B, 0xB2,
0x6D, 0xD3, 0x4D, 0x32, 0x56, 0x21, 0x33, 0x0B,
0x52, 0xE7, 0xAB, 0xEB, 0xA6, 0x74, 0x00, 0x4C,
0xB1, 0x7F, 0x82, 0x99, 0x87, 0x0E, 0x5E, 0xC0,
0x8F, 0xEE, 0x6F, 0x55, 0xF3, 0x7E, 0x08, 0x90,
0xFA, 0xB6, 0x64, 0x70, 0x47, 0x4A, 0x17, 0xA7,
0xB5, 0x40, 0x8A, 0x38, 0xE5, 0x68, 0x3E, 0x8B,
0x69, 0xAA, 0x9B, 0x42, 0xA5, 0x10, 0x01, 0x35,
0xFD, 0x61, 0x9E, 0xE6, 0x16, 0x9C, 0x86, 0xED,
0xCD, 0x2E, 0xFF, 0xC4, 0x5B, 0xA0, 0xAE, 0xCC,
0x4B, 0x3B, 0x03, 0xBB, 0x1C, 0x2A, 0xAC, 0x0C,
0x3F, 0x93, 0xC7, 0x72, 0x7A, 0x09, 0x22, 0x3D,
0x45, 0x78, 0xA9, 0xA8, 0xEA, 0xC9, 0x6A, 0xF7,
0x29, 0x91, 0xF0, 0x02, 0x18, 0x3A, 0x4E, 0x7C};
static byte Table3[] = {
0x73, 0x51, 0x95, 0xE1, 0x12, 0xE4, 0xC0, 0x58,
0xEE, 0xF2, 0x08, 0x1B, 0xA9, 0xFA, 0x98, 0x4C,
0xA7, 0x33, 0xE2, 0x1B, 0xA7, 0x6D, 0xF5, 0x30,
0x97, 0x1D, 0xF3, 0x02, 0x60, 0x5A, 0x82, 0x0F,
0x91, 0xD0, 0x9C, 0x10, 0x39, 0x7A, 0x83, 0x85,
0x3B, 0xB2, 0xB8, 0xAE, 0x0C, 0x09, 0x52, 0xEA,
0x1C, 0xE1, 0x8D, 0x66, 0x4F, 0xF3, 0xDA, 0x92,
0x29, 0xB9, 0xD5, 0xC5, 0x77, 0x47, 0x22, 0x53,
0x14, 0xF7, 0xAF, 0x22, 0x64, 0xDF, 0xC6, 0x72,
0x12, 0xF3, 0x75, 0xDA, 0xD7, 0xD7, 0xE5, 0x02,
0x9E, 0xED, 0xDA, 0xDB, 0x4C, 0x47, 0xCE, 0x91,
0x06, 0x06, 0x6D, 0x55, 0x8B, 0x19, 0xC9, 0xEF,
0x8C, 0x80, 0x1A, 0x0E, 0xEE, 0x4B, 0xAB, 0xF2,
0x08, 0x5C, 0xE9, 0x37, 0x26, 0x5E, 0x9A, 0x90,
0x00, 0xF3, 0x0D, 0xB2, 0xA6, 0xA3, 0xF7, 0x26,
0x17, 0x48, 0x88, 0xC9, 0x0E, 0x2C, 0xC9, 0x02,
0xE7, 0x18, 0x05, 0x4B, 0xF3, 0x39, 0xE1, 0x20,
0x02, 0x0D, 0x40, 0xC7, 0xCA, 0xB9, 0x48, 0x30,
0x57, 0x67, 0xCC, 0x06, 0xBF, 0xAC, 0x81, 0x08,
0x24, 0x7A, 0xD4, 0x8B, 0x19, 0x8E, 0xAC, 0xB4,
0x5A, 0x0F, 0x73, 0x13, 0xAC, 0x9E, 0xDA, 0xB6,
0xB8, 0x96, 0x5B, 0x60, 0x88, 0xE1, 0x81, 0x3F,
0x07, 0x86, 0x37, 0x2D, 0x79, 0x14, 0x52, 0xEA,
0x73, 0xDF, 0x3D, 0x09, 0xC8, 0x25, 0x48, 0xD8,
0x75, 0x60, 0x9A, 0x08, 0x27, 0x4A, 0x2C, 0xB9,
0xA8, 0x8B, 0x8A, 0x73, 0x62, 0x37, 0x16, 0x02,
0xBD, 0xC1, 0x0E, 0x56, 0x54, 0x3E, 0x14, 0x5F,
0x8C, 0x8F, 0x6E, 0x75, 0x1C, 0x07, 0x39, 0x7B,
0x4B, 0xDB, 0xD3, 0x4B, 0x1E, 0xC8, 0x7E, 0xFE,
0x3E, 0x72, 0x16, 0x83, 0x7D, 0xEE, 0xF5, 0xCA,
0xC5, 0x18, 0xF9, 0xD8, 0x68, 0xAB, 0x38, 0x85,
0xA8, 0xF0, 0xA1, 0x73, 0x9F, 0x5D, 0x19, 0x0B,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
0x33, 0x72, 0x39, 0x25, 0x67, 0x26, 0x6D, 0x71,
0x36, 0x77, 0x3C, 0x20, 0x62, 0x23, 0x68, 0x74,
0xC3, 0x82, 0xC9, 0x15, 0x57, 0x16, 0x5D, 0x81};
3,
0x0b,0x8b,0x4b,0xcb,0x2b,0xab,0x6b,0xeb,0x1b,0x9b
0x07,0x87,0x47,0xc7,0x27,0xa7,0x67,0xe7,0x17,0x97
0x0f,0x8f,0x4f,0xcf,0x2f,0xaf,0x6f,0xef,0x1f,0x9f
};
/*
*
* this function is only used internally when decrypting title key
*
*/
static void css_titlekey(byte *key, byte *im, byte invert)
{
unsigned int lfsr1_lo,lfsr1_hi,lfsr0,combined;
byte o_lfsr0, o_lfsr1;
byte k[5];
int i;
lfsr1_lo = im[0] | 0x100;
lfsr1_hi = im[1];
lfsr0 = ((im[4] >8)&0xff] >16)&0xff]>24)&0xff];
combined = 0;
for (i = 0; i >1;
lfsr1_lo = ((lfsr1_lo&1)>7)^(lfsr0>>10)^(lfsr0>>11)^(lfsr0>>
o_lfsr0 = (((((((lfsr0>>8)^lfsr0)>>1)^lfsr0)>>3)^lfsr0)>>7)
lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>8)|(o_lfsr0>= 8;
}
key[4]=k[4]^csstab1[key[4]]^key[3];
key[3]=k[3]^csstab1[key[3]]^key[2];
key[2]=k[2]^csstab1[key[2]]^key[1];
key[1]=k[1]^csstab1[key[1]]^key[0];
key[0]=k[0]^csstab1[key[0]]^key[4];
key[4]=k[4]^csstab1[key[4]]^key[3];
key[3]=k[3]^csstab1[key[3]]^key[2];
key[2]=k[2]^csstab1[key[2]]^key[1];
key[1]=k[1]^csstab1[key[1]]^key[0];
key[0]=k[0]^csstab1[key[0]];
}
/*
*
* this function decrypts a title key with the specified disk key
*
* tkey: the unobfuscated title key (XORed with BusKey)
* dkey: the unobfuscated disk key (XORed with BusKey)
* 2048 bytes in length (though only 5 bytes are needed, see below)
* pkey: array of pointers to player keys and disk key offsets
*
*
* use the result returned in tkey with css_descramble
*
*/
int css_decrypttitlekey(byte *tkey, byte *dkey, struct playkey **pkey)
{
byte test[5], pretkey[5];
int i = 0;
for (; *pkey; ++pkey, ++i) {
memcpy(pretkey, dkey + (*pkey)->offset, 5);
css_titlekey(pretkey, (*pkey)->key, 0);
memcpy(test, dkey, 5);
css_titlekey(test, pretkey, 0);
if (memcmp(test, pretkey, 5) == 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "Using Key %d\n", i+1);
break;
}
}
if (!*pkey) {
fprintf(stderr, "Shit - Need Key %d\n", i+1);
return 0;
}
css_titlekey(tkey, pretkey, 0xff);
return 1;
}
/*
*
* this function does the actual descrambling
*
* sec: encrypted sector (2048 bytes)
* key: decrypted title key obtained from css_decrypttitlekey
*
*/
void css_descramble(byte *sec,byte *key)
{
unsigned int lfsr1_lo,lfsr1_hi,lfsr0,combined;
unsigned char o_lfsr0, o_lfsr1;
unsigned char *end = sec + 0x800;
#define SALTED(i) (key[i] ^ sec[0x54 + (i)])
lfsr1_lo = SALTED(0) | 0x100;
lfsr1_hi = SALTED(1);
lfsr0 = ((SALTED(4) >8)&0xff] >16)&0xff]>24)&0xff];
sec+=0x80;
combined = 0;
while (sec != end) {
o_lfsr1 = lfsr1_bits0[lfsr1_hi] ^ lfsr1_bits1[lfsr1_lo];
lfsr1_hi = lfsr1_lo>>1;
lfsr1_lo = ((lfsr1_lo&1)>7)^(lfsr0>>10)^(lfsr0>>11)^(lfsr0>>
o_lfsr0 = (((((((lfsr0>>8)^lfsr0)>>1)^lfsr0)>>3)^lfsr0)>>7)
lfsr0 = (lfsr0>>8)|(o_lfsr0>= 8;
}
}
, &lba) != 0) {
perror("ioctl FIBMAP failed:");
close(fd);
return 0;
}
close(fd);
return lba;
}
int main(int ac, char **av)
{
char *device;
int fd, title = 0, lba = 0;
if (ac [title_path]\n");
exit (1);
}
device = av[1];
fd = open(device, O_RDONLY | O_NONBLOCK);
if (fd