linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] blkid: add --disable-libblkid (v2)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 05 May 2009 12:30:40 +0100
From:	Scott James Remnant <scott@...ntu.com>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blkid: add --disable-libblkid (v2)

On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 16:54 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:

> Scott, thanks for submitting these patches.   Two quick comments:
> 
> 1) It's greatly preferred if you submit each patch as separate e-mail
> messages, with the one-line summary as the subject (as you might find
> in a git submission or as described in sections 5.4 and 5.5 in the file
> Documentation/development-process/5.Posting in the Linux kernel sources).
> The reason for this is that the patchs will then be tracked in patchwork:
> 
>     http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-ext4/list/
> 
> and if it's accurately reflected there, it's much less likely that I
> won't accidentally forget to act on your patches, especially when I
> get busy/overloaded.  The best thing to do is to use "git
> format-patch" (which you apparenlty did to generate the patch), and
> then use "git send-email" to send out the patches.
> 
At this point, consider these patches "for your review" ;)  If you're
happy with them, I'll submit them to the mailing list properly.

> 2) While lsb_release is mandatory on Ubuntu systems (there is a
> dependency from ubuntu-minimal), it is not guaranteed to exist on
> Debian systems.
> 
That's why I have "|| Debian" in there.

This is the same rule we use in util-linux on Debian/Ubuntu.

> So how I already test for Ubuntu in the rules file is
> via this construct:
> 
> 	if test -f /etc/lsb-release && \
> 		grep -q DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu /etc/lsb-release; then \
> 	$(INSTALL) -p -m 0644 e2fsck/e2fsck.conf.ubuntu \
>        		${debdir}/e2fsprogs/etc/e2fsck.conf; \
> 	fi
> 
It's not guaranteed that /etc/lsb-release says DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu - if we
ever simply changed the defaults in lsb_release, then this would fail -
no?

> Hmm, one of these days I should probably check and see if Ubuntu
> finally fixed the installer and init scripts breakage which forced me
> to set a special e2fsck.conf file just for Ubuntu.  (See git commit
> 60702c26 in the e2fsprogs repository for more details.)
> 
We spent a very long time on this - in Jaunty this should be
rock-solidly correct <g>

> 3) In the "nice to have" category, it would be nice if whether or not
> blkid is built is controled via DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS flag instead of a
> free-standard environment variable, but I won't insist on that.
> 
Good idea.

Scott
-- 
Scott James Remnant
scott@...ntu.com

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)