Hi Eliot,

Do I want too? Or am I obligated? Very well then, I am trying the StackVMSimulator. Should I debug down to a primitive call to a cryptoplugin? Or what should I do? I'll need to prep an image.

I will need to get another Pi.

kindly,
robert

On 3/4/20 11:43 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote:

> Hi Rob,
>
>> On Mar 4, 2020, at 7:57 AM, Robert via Squeak-dev [<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>](mailto:squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org) wrote:
>
>> 
>>
>> Are there instructions for building Bochs, Nicolas?
>
> If you want to work on the cryptography plugins then as Nicolas suggests you can use the StackInterpreterSimulator.  You don’t need to use the JIT to work on a plugin, and the StackInterpreterSimulator is probably twice as fast as the JIT simulator (CogVMSimulator) since it isn’t simulating machine code, only interpreting bytecode.
>
>> tyk, r
>>
>> On 3/4/20 10:50 AM, Robert wrote:
>>
>>> Hi yo hehr, Nicolas,
>>>
>>> I tried the first block, in the simulation window, but it was missing BochsIA64 or some. I then ran the third block, a StackVM as you suggested. I ran it against my Cryptography repair image, rabbit, and very slooowly reselected the tests and ran them, in proogrress...
>>>
>>> We sure would be appreciating etwas help, as if there was a little angel out there who offers plugin repair and SHA512 code/plugin. Praying for an angel!
>>>
>>> tyk, r
>>>
>>> On 3/4/20 8:50 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Robert,
>>>> normally, most of VM/plugins development should take place with the VM-simulation from within the SpurVMMaker.image  (unless the plugin extensively call C functions from external libraries).
>>>> You will find a Worksapce with some simulation examples.
>>>> Then you might detect the error from within Smalltalk with debuggers etc...
>>>> I recommend simulating a Stack VM for a beginning (or you'll need to compile the Bochs plugin, which is currently difficult on linux...).
>>>>
>>>> Le mer. 4 mars 2020 à 14:40, Robert via Squeak-dev <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Levente,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I see what you are saying. Without the Crypto plugins, all the Crypto tests run green.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the Crypto plugins, things get messed up. ByteArray class>>#fromHexString: still completes, but the KeyHolder>>#key SEG-FAULTS the vm (called from CryptoRC2Test>>#testARC2). Additionally, the following two tests fail: CryptoDESTest>>#testDESCBC and CryptoDESTest>>#testTripleDESCBC.
>>>>>
>>>>> The SEG-FAULT comes from this code:
>>>>>
>>>>> KeyHolder new
>>>>>     data: KeyHolderData new;
>>>>>     encryptKey: #(0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) asByteArray;
>>>>>     key
>>>>>
>>>>> tyk, r
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/4/20 8:10 AM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Robert,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just ran all test cases of Cryptography-v5.3-rww.118.mcz in a fresh 5.3
>>>>>> image on 64-bit linux using the stock VM (no Cryptography plugins), and
>>>>>> all the tests are green.
>>>>>> ByteArray class >> #fromHexString: and methods sent by it were last
>>>>>> modified in 2010, and they do not accept non-hexadecimal digits in the
>>>>>> input string.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Levente
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020, Robert via Squeak-dev wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In squeak 5.3, building ByteArrays from HEX strings are now failing,
>>>>>>> after years of passing within the Cryptography tests.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The first doIt works, while the other two are now failing in the
>>>>>>> #readHexFrom: method...
>>>>>>> PASSING
>>>>>>> ByteArray fromHexString: '06a9214036b8a15b512e03d534120006'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FAILING
>>>>>>> ByteArray fromHexString: '16rc286696d887c9aa0611bbb3e2025a45a'
>>>>>>> ByteArray fromHexString: '00000000 00000000'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is causing multiple test failures in the Cryptography test suite.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tyk, r
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200304/1c63176f/attachment.html>