From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com (mail-pd0-f181.google.com [209.85.192.181]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B1B6ACED for ; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 00:28:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pd0-f181.google.com with SMTP id g10so10749324pdj.40 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 17:28:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=pZ+lYBetlGxgpCuSccTYDVn1CtpP1vBWwRMtQcPQFLs=; b=HrAIeB4kJKMyC2sTmRHCC6qgjBHfY2XzeOaPl4zVw8byNoLmMplaFUYZJ2TeLHsKda 1LylCCyXokJZiU0j+uLg2FmU5weJeOk3MAu7/KKxLR1anpXyI6TB2D/wGyH/oomP1Uym YWVHIXGtcKmqR2zzFWTpBUO13r/o1bZA3frlHsfeQD2aTXgKxKWdUzYqW/fDjvizUi4C lMJ3UqEZjPh8gNFsfhCK4cLpYuLDv4En3HhhSzQ4ontvxEsBaJ158RKQJp1SQkA8wf/4 OZVSdMn8DJQHafSMupnz0N1s+wKCHuZYff9SuAD3TNKae0IPt1DAANyYnsU7pGU2cHWI rkyQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmQ+GhAF4QUrK204jmJFXDch7WKSRE41eqjZ8mxUGnKmG4n6tY36PuK7HMjrmGtir1sKpZy X-Received: by 10.68.139.194 with SMTP id ra2mr41756313pbb.20.1406593731995; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 17:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:c:9380:601:d0e4:20cd:a8cf:9a4a? ([2601:c:9380:601:d0e4:20cd:a8cf:9a4a]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id eh4sm18899957pbc.79.2014.07.28.17.28.50 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 28 Jul 2014 17:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53D6EAC1.2030802@mvista.com> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 17:28:49 -0700 From: akuster User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Hatle , Khem Raj References: <53D2DE13.9010007@mvista.com> <53D65F40.7010701@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <53D65F40.7010701@windriver.com> Cc: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" , openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org, OE-core Subject: Re: libpcap-ng X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 00:28:56 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 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