Misleading documentation on the scrypt website regarding libscrypt-kdf

[sternenseemann]

Seems like the paragraph about "Using scrypt as a KDF" on the website was written before libscrypt-kdf: It suggests the header is crypto_scrypt.h and the function crypto_scrypt(). I believe this should be scrypt-kdf.h and scrypt_kdf() respectively?

[gperciva]

Thanks, @sternenseemann!

Definitely agreed that scrypt_kdf() should be mentioned on the website (and README). I'm checking with @cperciva about whether we want to keep the current discussion about crypto_scrypt() or not. If this was a new project, we'd only mention the scrypt_kdf() function, but there's ten years of people using crypto_scrypt() because that's all we had in the past.

[sternenseemann]

The function name is not that big of an issue in my opinion since they both can be used since scrypt_kdf is just an alias for crypto_scrypt. My main concern is that the documentation to me seemed to suggest that the header was crypto/scrypt.h or crypto_scrypt.h while make install would only install scrypt-kdf.h and likewise the debian package also only installs that header.

[gperciva]

Good point, thanks! I've rewritten it to discuss libscrypt-kdf first.

One tiny nitpick: make install will only install scrypt-kdf.h if you use ./configure --enable-libscrypt-kdf; it doesn't happen by default. Granted, it looks like many packagers are enabling this (which is great!), so maybe we don't need to worry so much about people installing it from scratch.

[gperciva]

The README and website have been updated, thanks!