From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: 01/02: gnu: libressl: Update to 2.5.3. Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:59:21 -0400 Message-ID: <20170413185921.GD14931@jasmine> References: <20170412011114.29557.46901@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20170412011115.CE2FF220BE@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87pogioukr.fsf@netris.org> <20170412152029.GA5920@jasmine> <87mvbkny4y.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44825) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cyjxo-0008B1-Pb for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:59:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cyjxl-0007hp-J3 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:59:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87mvbkny4y.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 05:08:29PM +0200, Ludovic Court=E8s wrote: > A simple approach is to force LibreSSL to always use its non-getentropy > code, and lift this restriction once we clearly require newer kernels=B9. > The attached patch does that. >=20 > Thoughts? > + ;; Do as if 'getentropy' was missing since older Linux kernels lack= it > + ;; and libc would return ENOSYS, which is not properly handled. > + '(#:configure-flags '("ac_cv_func_getentropy=3Dno"))) If we are committed to building glibc with the 2.6 kernel headers, and to providing substitutes for libressl and it's dependent packages, then I think this patch is a good option. But, it's a bit of a shame to leave this ~2.5 year old feature behind, especially when the 2.6 Linux series is not even part of the Linux long-term-support project. [0] These kernels *will* live for a long time through support from RHEL; their most recent kernel on RHEL7 is 3.10. However, I don't fully understand the impact of building glibc with a newer set of headers, so my objection is a weak one :) Personally, I don't think it's paramount to offer substitutes for the packages in question. But I know this is an unpopular position, in general :) [0] https://ltsi.linuxfoundation.org/ https://www.kernel.org/ --/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEsFFZSPHn08G5gDigJkb6MLrKfwgFAljvyokACgkQJkb6MLrK fwhLKg/6AvrMFVC5O773QwknvbtxLpJI2oIhGmUEqyxV5484Vm9GvPuAFEffVvxD Cnc8LSfpu8rV+SUN/tfTRNmL8xmuixB4yDAFtUcvsV8GevjogzBI+HMY5SITKd7q /4r42neTsfouvBuEbNDcUOFQgELkdmDtyzhyY0/Tu+562dgW3vnFr/psHrzFdrDf y2owT4lvjeEs99/AfH/YD1rFS4ae+1zrhrimjGeIkJZg0VdApA2CIvFOW3z/LjwC HfUeTkKkq1qiYPN8Rgl6EDfQEszSHR6//C6VV+99fQqWQ/T5G/FF07/WoOU/AKcR a2asoT1fBOcCrcKHb+NqA+R+naotc+5PcJzXFajL1TP7+lm2zYtQMXptkcjjQ4He P1sKDZV/WF1vDjRngGYPSAkJ/NlSDEd+GH+sUrwr2ClvAKs82vL06beLhJVzvz8N sQHU778X52P3MXgiXjdKKIhG3R6TXlgxWIVlynD8GN2Za9ZBcpI5TYd2FifO5y8H HR7uduuOdLXs6BhYL7iVJJyHCps2Isr5Zbiqm2/+C8YCYs0Whn3HBEjKjf/4ax1Y 4Wv4+eBGRkdTIE3I7C0zL3NpVl2Pe9inQJtfNW+Ok7wzHd3bN0td9ogFibi2D3rt QglEiYapjTt9OvaIz92FIr+zm1k+zQiUIjz7sF1p09ei+RaCTFE= =X6Dd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO--