Ken Moffat wrote:
On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 01:10:53AM +0100, Tim Tassonis wrote:
Hi all
I just read that in order to sign modules in the latest 4.3 kernel, one has
to have openssl installed.
I just wondered if it would be an idea to move openssl from blfs to lfs? Not
that I personally need this feature urgently or really want to advocate the
change.
But since openssl probably already is one of the first blfs packages people
install (to get remote ssh access via openssh), it also wouldn't harm much
moving it to lfs.
I think most LFS builders do not need to sign kernel modules, indeed
some LFS users try to avoid modules altogether. I really do not
think that many of our (LFS,BLFS) users will get any benefit from
signng their modules.
Also, while people building {.B}LFS on servers or firewalls are likely
to use ssh, I suspect that the proportion of our desktop builders who
use openssh is below 50%.
I agree with you Ken that LFS users don't really have a need to sign (or use)
modules. However, I would think that desktop users would want ssh too. Even if a
build is in a virtual system, ssh makes it very easy to build where copy/paste is
not always easy directly into a virtual system.
I think one of the hardest parts of building a desktop is between the end of LFS and
when Xorg is completed with a decent graphical browser. I know it can be done in
chroot, but I don't think that is the easiest way.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
