From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 18:23:03 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 0/8] Bump of SElinux related libs/tools to 3.0 In-Reply-To: <20200414152528.20758-1-matthew.weber@rockwellcollins.com> References: <20200414152528.20758-1-matthew.weber@rockwellcollins.com> Message-ID: <20200414182303.250cc38d@windsurf.home> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 10:25:20 -0500 Matt Weber wrote: > - Switches to using the date (i.e. 20191204) abased release tagging > for better alignment with https://release-monitoring.org/project/01717/ > > - Added selinux-python which was missed in the v2 of this bump by > Adam (http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/list/?series=156673) I am not sure I like the change to using the single big tarball with everything included, and then have each individual package build its own sub-directory. They ship individual tarballs, it seems a lot better to use that. Is the only benefit of that change the fact that it will match with what release monitoring says ? Even Fedora, who is the original project using release-monitoring uses the real version numbers for SELinux: $ rpm -qa | grep libselinux libselinux-utils-2.9-5.fc31.x86_64 libselinux-2.9-5.fc31.i686 libselinux-devel-2.9-5.fc31.x86_64 libselinux-2.9-5.fc31.x86_64 So to me, it seems like we should instead change the versions reported by release-monitoring.org instead. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com