libpcap-ng

libpcap-ng

[akuster]

Hello all,

Meta-security and Meta-selinux both have libcap-ng. Instead of 
maintaining the same package in both places, can we get it into OE where 
libcap resides?


regards,
Armin

Re: libpcap-ng

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:45 PM, akuster <akuster@mvista.com> wrote:
> Meta-security and Meta-selinux both have libcap-ng. Instead of maintaining
> the same package in both places, can we get it into OE where libcap resides?

I think at very least you can propose it for meta-oe if not or-core.
But I also wonder why meta-selinux is not a sub-layer under
meta-security,

Re: libpcap-ng

[Mark Hatle]

On 7/25/14, 10:02 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:45 PM, akuster <akuster@mvista.com> wrote:
>> Meta-security and Meta-selinux both have libcap-ng. Instead of maintaining
>> the same package in both places, can we get it into OE where libcap resides?
>
> I think at very least you can propose it for meta-oe if not or-core.
> But I also wonder why meta-selinux is not a sub-layer under
> meta-security,
>

meta-selinux existed first... no other reason.


The last time I looked at meta-security (well over a year ago), it wasn't 
terribly useful.  It was just a random collection of security-like packages, 
some worked, some didn't.

If it has grown since then to be more of a cohesive set of packages, then 
meta-selinux being part of it may make sense.

--Mark

Re: libpcap-ng

[akuster]

On 07/28/2014 07:33 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 7/25/14, 10:02 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:45 PM, akuster <akuster@mvista.com> wrote:
>>> Meta-security and Meta-selinux both have libcap-ng. Instead of
>>> maintaining
>>> the same package in both places, can we get it into OE where libcap
>>> resides?
>>
>> I think at very least you can propose it for meta-oe if not or-core.

I think core libcap-ng recipe belongs in a common layer and not 
maintained in two places.

>> But I also wonder why meta-selinux is not a sub-layer under
>> meta-security,
>>
>
> meta-selinux existed first... no other reason.
>
>
> The last time I looked at meta-security (well over a year ago), it
> wasn't terribly useful.

Well when a security package like 'snort' and maybe others are in other 
locations, I can see why meta-security won't be very useful.

  It was just a random collection of
> security-like packages, some worked, some didn't.

Hopefully that will change.

- Armin

>
> If it has grown since then to be more of a cohesive set of packages,
> then meta-selinux being part of it may make sense.
>
> --Mark

Re: libpcap-ng

[Khem Raj]

On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 5:28 PM, akuster <akuster@mvista.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think at very least you can propose it for meta-oe if not or-core.
>
>
> I think core libcap-ng recipe belongs in a common layer and not maintained
> in two places.

yes meta-oe is kind of extended common layer besides oe-core, if it
can be proven that we can drop libpcap and replace its use completely
with libpcap-ng you might have a better case to include it in oe-core,

>
>
>>> But I also wonder why meta-selinux is not a sub-layer under
>>> meta-security,
>>>
>>
>> meta-selinux existed first... no other reason.
>>
>>
>> The last time I looked at meta-security (well over a year ago), it
>> wasn't terribly useful.
>
>
> Well when a security package like 'snort' and maybe others are in other
> locations, I can see why meta-security won't be very useful.
>
>
>  It was just a random collection of
>>
>> security-like packages, some worked, some didn't.
>
>
> Hopefully that will change.