Op 21-01-19 om 20:12 schreef Chet Ramey: > On 1/20/19 9:04 PM, Rawiri Blundell wrote: >> For what it's worth I did consider suggesting URANDOM, however I >> figured some users may confuse it like this: >> >> RANDOM -> /dev/random >> URANDOM -> /dev/urandom >> >> Couple that with an established base of myths about /dev/urandom, I >> thought it might be best to suggest something else to eliminate that >> potential confusion. > > I can see that, but I think RANDOM is established enough that nobody > assumes it has anything to do with /dev/random.
Not every shell scripter has years of experience. If you pair a RANDOM with a URANDOM in the shell, then I do think many people will automatically associate these with /dev/random and /dev/urandom. Also, I think the name should describe the functionality, not the specific way it's obtained -- because that could change at some point in the future, and/or become system-dependent. So I think SRANDOM is the best name (or SECURE_RANDOM, though that is a bit long). > If we're converging on something like URANDOM (or some other name) for a > better RNG, I don't see the need to change the RANDOM generator. FWIW, I agree. - M.
