Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] tools: make flask utils build unconditional

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 14:37 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> 
> which on the basis of this discussion I wasn't expecting. I didn't see this
> new file on i686 or ARM*.
> 
> My baseline is from the last time I committed, which would be last year, so
> maybe something other than my current batch of patches has caused this.
> 
> I'm going to drop this one for now and (hopefully) get the rest of the
> batch squared away. Afterwards I'll take another look (with a new baseline
> filelist), but if someone can explain it in the meantime that would be
> super.

So with a fresh basline I still see:

--- ../FILE_LIST.BASE.staging.x86_64ÂÂÂÂ2016-01-05 14:50:32.000000000 +0000
+++ ../FILE_LIST.staging.x86_64 2016-01-05 15:11:15.000000000 +0000
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
Âdist/install/boot/xen-4.7-unstable.gz
Âdist/install/boot/xen-4.gz
Âdist/install/boot/xen.gz
+dist/install/boot/xenpolicy-4.7-unstable
Âdist/install/etc
Âdist/install/etc/bash_completion.d
Âdist/install/etc/bash_completion.d/xl.sh
@@ -386,6 +387,12 @@
Âdist/install/usr/local/lib/xen/libexec
Âdist/install/usr/local/lib/xen/libexec/qemu-bridge-helper
Âdist/install/usr/local/sbin
+dist/install/usr/local/sbin/flask-get-bool
+dist/install/usr/local/sbin/flask-getenforce
+dist/install/usr/local/sbin/flask-label-pci
+dist/install/usr/local/sbin/flask-loadpolicy
+dist/install/usr/local/sbin/flask-set-bool
+dist/install/usr/local/sbin/flask-setenforce
Âdist/install/usr/local/sbin/gdbsx
Âdist/install/usr/local/sbin/gtracestat
Âdist/install/usr/local/sbin/gtraceview
*** FILES DIFFER ***

On i686 and ARM* I only see the (expected) second hunk.

I think the i686 case is explainable by the lack of a hypervisor build
there, but I'm unsure why ARM* and x86_64 should differ in this regard.

config/Tools.mk is y only on x86_64, not on the others, which obviously
explains things, but the question is why only on x86_64 (I presume this has
always been the case and it was previously masked, but I've not checked).

Ah, OK, I misread

AX_ARG_DEFAULT_ENABLE([xsmpolicy], [Disable XSM policy compilation])

as being default disable, actually the default is "enabled iff checkpolicy
is installed" and it happens to be that it is only installed in my x86_64
build env.

So, in the end I think Wei was correct and this change will now, in some
circumstances, end up installing a /boot/xenpolicy-*.

So the question is do we mind that?

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel