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:   Tue, 8 Oct 2019 17:29:51 +0200
From:   Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 5/7] libbpf: move
 bpf_{helpers,endian,tracing}.h into libbpf

On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 11:30:26 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Surely for distroes tho - they would have kernel headers matching the
> kernel release they ship. If parts of libbpf from GH only work with
> the latest kernel, distroes should ship libbpf from the kernel source,
> rather than GH.

I don't see a problem here for distros. Distros control both the kernel
and libbpf, there's no problem in keeping those in sync.

Packaging libbpf from the kernel source would not help anything -
updating libbpf would still require a new kernel. There's no difference
between updating libbpf from a github repo or from the kernel source,
as far as dependencies are concerned.

 Jiri

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ