linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts/package/mkdebian: expose KCONFIG

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

Date:   Fri, 8 Mar 2019 00:29:50 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Arseny Maslennikov <ar@...msu.ru>
Cc:     Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
        Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/package/mkdebian: expose KCONFIG_CONFIG to debian/rules

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 7:21 AM Arseny Maslennikov <ar@...msu.ru> wrote:
>
> If KCONFIG_CONFIG is passed to `make deb-pkg` as a makeflag or
> environment variable, the source tarball produced contains whatever
> specified by that variable instead of the usual `.config'.
>
> While `make deb-pkg' yields a correct Debian binary package (at least
> on amd64), the generated source package's debian/rules does not pass
> KCONFIG_CONFIG to make(1), thus rendering the source package unable to
> be rebuilt.
>
> Steps to reproduce the kind of failure being fixed:
> 1)  Produce a source and binary package with:
>         % KCONFIG_CONFIG=my.config make deb-pkg
> 2)  In the parent directory:
>         % dpkg-source -x linux-*.dsc
> 3)  In the unpacked source directory:
>         % debuild -i -us -uc
>
> Here is an excerpt from an example output of `debuild -i -us -uc':
>
> make[2]: *** No rule to make target '.config', needed by 'kernel/config_data.gz'.  Stop.
> make[1]: *** [Makefile:1043: kernel] Error 2
> make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/ar/linux-kernel/deb/linux-5.0.0-rc5-tks-gitd6ff78479ec5-57-5.0.0-rc5-tks-gitd6ff78479ec5-57'
> make: *** [debian/rules:4: build] Error 2
> dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build subprocess returned exit status 2
> debuild: fatal error at line 1182:
> dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -ui -i failed



I am not convinced with this patch.

People would be upset if they got a source package and
they  did not find the .config in the standard location.

It is difficult to notice the .config has been moved
to somewhere until they check debian/rules.

Why do we need to create such a strange package?





> Signed-off-by: Arseny Maslennikov <ar@...msu.ru>
> ---
>  scripts/package/mkdebian | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/package/mkdebian b/scripts/package/mkdebian
> index edcad61fe3cd..130d3f6696eb 100755
> --- a/scripts/package/mkdebian
> +++ b/scripts/package/mkdebian
> @@ -207,10 +207,12 @@ cat <<EOF > debian/rules
>
>  build:
>         \$(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=${version} ARCH=${ARCH} \
> +       KCONFIG_CONFIG=${KCONFIG_CONFIG} \
>         KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=${revision} KBUILD_SRC=
>
>  binary-arch:
>         \$(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=${version} ARCH=${ARCH} \
> +       KCONFIG_CONFIG=${KCONFIG_CONFIG} \
>         KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=${revision} KBUILD_SRC= intdeb-pkg
>
>  clean:
> --
> 2.20.1
>


--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada