netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] tools: bpftool: fix reading from /proc/config.gz

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:   Sat, 10 Aug 2019 00:20:42 +0100
From:   Peter Wu <peter@...ensteyn.nl>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin.monnet@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tools: bpftool: fix reading from /proc/config.gz

Hi all,

Thanks for the lovely feedback :)

On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 02:57:26PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 14:48:31 -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > I'm just being nit picky :-)
> > Because changelog says we already depend on -lz, but then in the patch
> > we explicitly add it.

What I meant by that is that zlib is not a new dependency since it is
already a mandatory dependency of libelf which is currently marked as
mandatory dependency in bpftool. That is why I did not bother with
adding a feature test either since it would be redundant.

Adding an explicit dependency helps if you want to build bpftool as
static binary, or if libelf somehow drops zlib in the future.
-- 
Kind regards,
Peter Wu
https://lekensteyn.nl