| 1 |
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:38:29 -0400 |
| 2 |
"Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 03/13/2011 04:19 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Saturday, March 12, 2011 07:36:35 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> I wonder why pax-utils.eclass uses elog instead of just einfo. An |
| 7 |
> >> example message looks like this: |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> * Fallback PaX marking -m |
| 10 |
> >> * out/Release/chrome |
| 11 |
> >> |
| 12 |
> >> IMHO it's not very useful in the elog messages, but maybe there are |
| 13 |
> >> scenarios in which it is useful. |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> >> My idea is to just replace all elogs with einfos in |
| 16 |
> >> pax-utils.eclass. What do you think? |
| 17 |
> > i think it depends on the person. for people who dont use |
| 18 |
> > grsec/PaX, they probably could care less and never see this |
| 19 |
> > output. for people who do, they probably do want to see this. |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > maybe have it `elog` only when [[ $(uname -r) == *-grsec* ]] |
| 22 |
> > -mike |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> blueness@yellowness ~ $ uname -r |
| 25 |
> 2.6.37-hardened-r5 |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> so you need == *-hardened-* |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I'd suggest doing something like: |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
use hardened && elog ... |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
There's an argument that it's better to make decisions according to |
| 34 |
make.conf settings rather than the host system configuration, not |
| 35 |
least to cater for people doing cross-builds. Assuming cross builds |
| 36 |
work at all; I've not tried that for a long time. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Kev. |
Archives