Re: native CA cert bundles (was: Re: [PATCH 3/3] cve-check-tool: Use CA cert bundle in correct sysroot)

[Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>]

On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:06 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com
> > wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 21:38 +0200, Jussi Kukkonen wrote:
> > There is https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9883
> > open
> > about some aspect of this, but it doesn't actually address the
> > underlying question about what the right behavior should be. It's
> > based
> > on the assumption that libcurl-native should always use ca-
> > certificates-native.
> > 
> > Thoughts anyone?
> 
> I agree it should use ca-certificates-native for all native; it
> allows for self-signed internal certificates to be added for internal
> development.

But that's not what bitbake itself uses. Are you saying that bitbake
fetchers etc. should also use whatever certificates are configured for
ca-certificates-native? That leads to a chicken-and-egg problem.

A solution where custom certificates need to be configured in two
different places (system for bitbake, ca-certificates-native for some
other tools) sounds sub-optimal to me.

-- 
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.