[RFC] Drop md5sum, crc32 and sha1 cmds in favor of hash cmd

[Peter Robinson]

On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 at 13:48, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 02:00:16PM +0100, Igor Opaniuk wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was playing a bit with different hash functions recently, and
> > it turned out that md5sum, crc32, sha1 cmds just duplicate
> > what is already covered by generic `hash` cmd.
> >
> > => sha1 0x60000000 0x200
> > sha1 for 60000000 ... 600001ff ==> 4ff5ffc91d00a95155518b920f46e2483d0e1437
> > => hash sha1 0x60000000 0x200
> > sha1 for 60000000 ... 600001ff ==> 4ff5ffc91d00a95155518b920f46e2483d0e1437
> >
> > => crc32 0x60000000 0x200
> > crc32 for 60000000 ... 600001ff ==> 6fe352e8
> > => hash crc32 0x60000000 0x200
> > crc32 for 60000000 ... 600001ff ==> 6fe352e8
> >
> > => md5sum 0x60000000 0x200
> > md5 for 60000000 ... 600001ff ==> e6bbbe95f5b41996f4a9b9af7bbd4050
> > => hash md5 0x60000000 0x200
> > md5 for 60000000 ... 600001ff ==> e6bbbe95f5b41996f4a9b9af7bbd4050
> >
> > Considering that most of them (besides md5sum) are using the same
> > int hash_command() function under the hood, but have a lot of duplicated
> > code for handling params, does it make sense to do some cleanup and
> > drop all them in favour  `hash`?
> >
> > I also plan to extend usage info for `hash` by adding a list
> > compiled-in algos based on hash related compiled flags
> > (CONFIG_SHA1, CONFIG_CRC32 etc), so it's clear what algos
> > are available for hash calculation.
> >
> > Comments/objections are welcome!
>
> It would be good, implementation wise, if each of those commands was
> just a redirect to hash ..., similar to how "load ...." will call the
> right filesystem calls. Does that make sense? Thanks.

Yes, I actually have that one my todo list to basically alias the
individual commands to the hash command to remove those commands. My
intention there was a first step to allow us to eventually minimise or
even remove the use of obsolete hashes etc.