netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2] Revert "Makefile: ensure CONF_USR

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, 10 Nov 2023 14:54:16 +0100
From: Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
To: <aclaudi@...hat.com>
CC: Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>, <luca.boccassi@...il.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2] Revert "Makefile: ensure CONF_USR_DIR honours
 the libdir config"


Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com> writes:

> luca.boccassi@...il.com writes:
>
>> From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@...ian.org>
>>
>> LIBDIR in Debian and derivatives is not /usr/lib/, it's
>> /usr/lib/<architecture triplet>/, which is different, and it's the
>> wrong location where to install architecture-independent default
>> configuration files, which should always go to /usr/lib/ instead.
>> Installing these files to the per-architecture directory is not
>> the right thing, hence revert the change.
>
> So I looked into the Fedora package. Up until recently, the files were
> in /etc, but it seems there was a deliberate change in the spec file
> this September that moved them to /usr/lib or /usr/lib64.
>
> Luca -- since you both sent the patch under reversion, and are Fedora

Ugh, I mean Andrea, not Luca. Sorry!

> maintainer, could you please elaborate on what the logic was behind it?
> It does look odd to me to put config files into an arch-dependent
> directory, but I've been out of packaging for close to a decade at this
> point.