linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Fail the build early when no lz4 present

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, 16 Oct 2018 18:17:50 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Fail the build early when no lz4 present

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:33 AM Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 12:08:07AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > Install lz4c, and run 'make' again.
> > Almost all objects have been built there,
> > so you will finish it soon.
>
> So when this LZ4 thing got added at the time, the lz4 package had to be
> downloaded and built and installed and it wasn't as easy as zypper in
> lz4 or apt-get install lz4.
>
> And I *might* install it if there were a human readable error message
> which would tell me so.
>
> And we should strive to be as user-friendly as possible. And no, this:
>
> /bin/sh: 1: lz4c: not found
> make[2]: *** [arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile:145: arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin.lz4] Error 1
> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> make[1]: *** [arch/x86/boot/Makefile:112: arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 2
> make: *** [arch/x86/Makefile:290: bzImage] Error 2
> make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>
> is not user-friendly.
>
> > If you are building up a compile-test machine,
> > you will probably need to install various tools anyway.
>
> Yes, and look how perf tool solves this. Much much better.
>
> > I do not want to add ugly checks in random places.
>
> That's fair.
>
> What would be a fitting place to add such checks and be able to issue a
> human-readable error message to people?

Sorry for delay.

I have been thinking of this
because I have a motivation to
move libelf check in the top Makefile to somewhere else.

I just made a trial.


-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada