On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 2:50 PM, Vlad Grigorescu <[email protected]> wrote: > There are a couple of cases where I think it'd be useful to have a bro-devel > package -- a package that I can install on a system, and then be able to > build plugins against Bro. (This is the same model as other *-devel > packages, such as openssl, libpcap, etc.)
Yes, I think it's useful and something that should be done. It was fairly low on my list of things to try to do before 2.6. Related: https://bro-tracker.atlassian.net/browse/BIT-1922 > I'm curious how people are dealing with this issue, and if anyone has > thoughts on whether this would be useful, and if so, what it would take to > build such a package. My guess as to what needs to be done: * separate bifcl into its own submodule: I think this should be easy * install Bro's headers: at least I think that's all that we need to do on our end, it's also a bit of an open question as to whether we just install them all for now until we get a more organized API or can get away with a smaller subset * update the plugin CMake/configure skeletons and/or bro-config to be able to make use of the above two points - Jon _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
