From: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>,
nathan@kernel.org, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] certs: Fix wrong kconfig option used for x509_revocation_list
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 19:28:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <77085577-01EB-48F5-868B-E7A1813363A1@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <147604.1614981032@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:50 PM, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ hostprogs-always-$(CONFIG_ASN1) += asn1_compiler
>> hostprogs-always-$(CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORMAT) += sign-file
>> hostprogs-always-$(CONFIG_SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYRING) += extract-cert
>> hostprogs-always-$(CONFIG_SYSTEM_EXTRA_CERTIFICATE) += insert-sys-cert
>> - hostprogs-always-$(CONFIG_SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_KEYRING) += extract-cert
>> +hostprogs-always-$(CONFIG_SYSTEM_REVOCATION_LIST) += extract-cert
>
> Hmmm... We have extract-cert listed twice. Does that matter, I wonder?
Isn’t this necessary, since one could build with either
CONFIG_SYSTEM_REVOCATION_LIST or CONFIG_SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYRING, without
the other being defined?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-09 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-04 17:50 [PATCH v2] certs: Fix wrong kconfig option used for x509_revocation_list Eric Snowberg
2021-03-04 18:10 ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-03-05 21:50 ` David Howells
2021-03-09 2:28 ` Eric Snowberg [this message]
2021-03-09 11:46 ` David Howells
2021-03-10 19:43 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-03-10 19:44 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-03-11 0:04 ` Eric Snowberg
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=77085577-01EB-48F5-868B-E7A1813363A1@oracle.com \
--to=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).