From: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>
To: Armin Kuster <akuster808@gmail.com>
Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [meta-security][PATCH 5/6] libtpm: update to tip.
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:59:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1485788377.20333.143.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1485709952-13916-5-git-send-email-akuster808@gmail.com>
On Sun, 2017-01-29 at 09:12 -0800, Armin Kuster wrote:
> diff --git a/recipes-tpm/libtpm/files/fix_dprintf_issue.patch
> b/recipes-tpm/libtpm/files/fix_dprintf_issue.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..25760bb
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/recipes-tpm/libtpm/files/fix_dprintf_issue.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
> +Upstream-Status: Pending
> +Signed-off-by: Armin Kuster <akuster808@gmail.com>
Just wondering: what's your approach regarding "pending" patches? Accept
them into the layer, then submit upstream later as time permits?
Besides that, the six patches are all fine, so please consider them
Signed-off-by: Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>
However, when I started using these recipes already before the latest
changes, I had to fix quite a few things before the recipes were usable
(will send patches shortly):
- tcsd from trousers doesn't start because of incorrect ownership of
/etc/tcsd.conf
- swtpm was more useful for me as a native tool in combination with
Stefan's qemu-tpm patches, but couldn't be compiled natively
- libtspi.so.1 was not getting installed, causing tpm tools to fail
I had the impression that the recipes were mostly in a "they build" kind
of state, but not really used much in practice. Is that correct?
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-30 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-29 17:12 [meta-security][PATCH 1/6] tpm2.0-tss: fix musl build error Armin Kuster
2017-01-29 17:12 ` [meta-security][PATCH 2/6] qemu: use wildcard for PV Armin Kuster
2017-01-29 17:12 ` [meta-security][PATCH 3/6] tpm-tools: update to 1.3.9 Armin Kuster
2017-01-29 17:12 ` [meta-security][PATCH 4/6] trousers: update to 0.3.14 Armin Kuster
2017-01-29 17:12 ` [meta-security][PATCH 5/6] libtpm: update to tip Armin Kuster
2017-01-30 14:59 ` Patrick Ohly [this message]
2017-01-29 17:12 ` [meta-security][PATCH 6/6] swtpm: " Armin Kuster
2017-01-30 15:32 ` Patrick Ohly
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1485788377.20333.143.camel@intel.com \
--to=patrick.ohly@intel.com \
--cc=akuster808@gmail.com \
--cc=yocto@yoctoproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.