[Bug 218556] Review Request: ecryptfs-utils - Linux eCryptfs utilities

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: ecryptfs-utils - Linux eCryptfs utilities


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218556


kevin at tummy.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review+              |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com  2007-06-07 19:24 EST -------
Thanks for looking at this!

We had gotten rid of the rpath in the past... looks like it's crept back. 
Will get that fixed. 

>1) keyutils, openssl, pam requirements should be superfluous - library
>dependencies take care of this

ok. Removed. 

>2) kernel requires are tricky. Generally, we do
>
>Conflicts: kernel < 2.6.19
>
>as there's no reason, for example, to pull a kernel into a buildroot.

Well, the tricky part here is we need to require a kernel with ecryptfs.ko in
it. For F-7 and devel no problems, as all of them have it. For FC-6 however, the
early kernels didn't, and the updated ones do. I thought that the error end
users get from yum on Requires is more usefull than Conflicts?

>That's bad; these shouldn't be linked against things in /usr/lib. (Yes, some
>people still run /usr separate.) Moreover, I suspect that both of these will
>also dlopen the plugins in $(libdir)/ecryptfs?

Thats a good Question. Michael? Any thoughts?
Yes, those .so's under libdir/ecryptfs/ do dlopen the so's. 
This sounds like something for upstream to change?

> -devel: what, if anything, will ever build against this? If there's nothing,
>it may not be worth shipping. (Also,does this package maintain a stable ABI?)

I don't know of anything... Michael?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.