From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@citrix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>,
Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org>, Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
<xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH] xen: allow XSM_FLASK_POLICY only if checkpolicy binary is available
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2021 14:15:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <17a250d3-1c1b-f079-c950-5590975e56ae@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <be712d94-7fac-fc34-3f61-61819c5cbc42@suse.com>
On 15/07/2021 07:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 14.07.2021 18:17, Anthony PERARD wrote:
>> --- a/xen/common/Kconfig
>> +++ b/xen/common/Kconfig
>> @@ -25,6 +25,9 @@ config GRANT_TABLE
>> config HAS_ALTERNATIVE
>> bool
>>
>> +config HAS_CHECKPOLICY
>> + def_bool $(success,$(CHECKPOLICY) -h 2>&1 | grep -q xen)
>> +
> This is no different from other aspects of "Kconfig vs tool chain
> capabilities" sent out last August to start a discussion about
> whether we really want such. Besides Jürgen no-one cared to reply
> iirc, which to me means no-one really cares one way or the other.
You know full well that upgrading Kconfig was specifically to be able to
use this functionality, and you know full well that I firmly support
using this mechanism, because we've had both of these arguments several
times before.
The absence of replies doesn't mean people agree with you, or even that
they don't care. It either means people didn't read the email, or
didn't have time to reply, or didn't feel like wasting time rehashing
the same arguments yet again with no hope for progress.
If you really insist on refusing to features specifically intended for
the improvement of our build processes, then call a vote so we can be
done with the argument for once and for all.
~Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-16 13:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-14 16:17 [XEN PATCH] xen: allow XSM_FLASK_POLICY only if checkpolicy binary is available Anthony PERARD
2021-07-14 16:51 ` Jason Andryuk
2021-07-14 17:09 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-07-15 6:25 ` Jan Beulich
2021-07-16 12:36 ` Anthony PERARD
2021-07-16 13:15 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2021-07-16 14:34 ` Jan Beulich
2021-07-16 16:23 ` Anthony PERARD
2021-07-16 12:38 ` [XEN PATCH v2] " Anthony PERARD
2021-07-16 13:00 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-07-19 7:37 ` Jan Beulich
2021-07-19 10:47 ` Anthony PERARD
2021-07-19 11:04 ` Jan Beulich
2021-07-19 14:33 ` George Dunlap
2021-07-16 15:26 ` [XEN PATCH] " George Dunlap
2021-07-16 15:50 ` Juergen Gross
2021-07-16 15:56 ` Anthony PERARD
2021-07-16 16:14 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-07-19 7:10 ` Jan Beulich
2021-07-16 16:27 ` Anthony PERARD
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=17a250d3-1c1b-f079-c950-5590975e56ae@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=anthony.perard@citrix.com \
--cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=iwj@xenproject.org \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=julien@xen.org \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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.