linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Enable building of the devel RPM package from Kbuild

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: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:08:57 +0000
From: Pratham Patel <prathampatel@...fossguy.com>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thefirst1322@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Enable building of the devel RPM package from Kbuild

On Wed Apr 17, 2024 at 8:18 PM IST, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 04:37:32AM +0000, Pratham Patel wrote:
> > This addresses a minor nit where I want a `-devel` RPM package to be
> > built when I build a binary RPM package with either `binrpm-pkg`
> > or `rpm-pkg` target(s).
> >
> > Pratham Patel (2):
> >   kbuild: allow toggling the `with_devel` RPM macro
> >   docs: kbuild: document KBUILD_RPM_WITH_DEVEL
> >
> >  Documentation/kbuild/kbuild.rst | 6 ++++++
> >  scripts/Makefile.package        | 5 ++++-
> >  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > --
> > 2.42.0
> >
>
> Hmmm, when I execute
>
>   $ make -skj"$(nproc)" ARCH=x86_64 O=build mrproper defconfig binrpm-pkg
>
> I end up with
>
>   $ ls -1 build/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64
>   kernel-6.9.0_rc4_00031_g96fca68c4fbf-1.x86_64.rpm
>   kernel-devel-6.9.0_rc4_00031_g96fca68c4fbf-1.x86_64.rpm
>   kernel-headers-6.9.0_rc4_00031_g96fca68c4fbf-1.x86_64.rpm
>
> so it seems like this is already happening?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan

Ah sorry, that was a typo. I meant to say the following:
"This addresses a minor nit where I **don't** want a `-devel` RPM
package to be built when I build a binary RPM package with either
`binrpm-pkg` or `rpm-pkg` target(s)."

That is because on ARM systems where I just need to quickly test the
upstream defconfig, I don't really need the `-devel` package.

Also, I see that in a hurry, I did the opposite of what I wanted in the
patches. This went unnoticed since I had KBUILD_RPM_WITH_DEVEL=0 for me
during testing. Sorry about that!

I'll send a v2 fixing this stupid mistake.

 -- Pratham Patel