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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 08:43:30 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com> To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com> Subject: Re: How to package e2scrub On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 12:07:13PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Thu 30-05-19 09:51:55, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:59:07AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > Yeah, my plan is to just not package cron bits at all since openSUSE / SLES > > > support only systemd init anyway these days (and in fact our distro people > > > want to deprecate cron in favor of systemd). I guess I'll split off the > > > scrub bits into a separate sub-package (likely e2fsprogs will suggest > > > installation of this sub-package) and the service will be disabled by > > > default. > > > > I'm not super-fond of extra sub-packages for their own sake, and the > > extra e2scrub bits are small enough (about 32k?) that I don't believe > > it justifies an extra sub-package; but that's a distribution-level > > packaging decision, so it's certainly fine if we're not completely aligned. > > Yes, size is not a big concern but the scrub bits require util-linux, lvm, > and mailer to work correctly and I don't want to add these dependencies to > stock e2fsprogs package because some minimal installations do not want e.g. > lvm at all. Granted these are just scripts so I could get away with not > requiring e.g. lvm at all but it seems user-unfriendly to leave it up to > user to determine that his systemd-service fails due to missing packages. All good reasons for a separate package, particularly considering that on the RH side they've split out xfs_scrub because of its python 3 dependencies. > > Out of curiosity, were any of the complaints that you've heard gone > > beyond people who ran into the various e2scrub/e2scrub_all bugs? I'm > > curious what their concerns were. > > I didn't hear any complaints so far. But I have my doubts anyone actually > run that code so far - openSUSE Tumbleweed has limited userbase, we do > installs to btrfs by default, we don't propose LVM by default, and I didn't > enable the service files to run by default. (I suspect it's only Debian Unstable users who are running it right now...) --D > > Honza > -- > Jan Kara <jack@...e.com> > SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists