Bug#863295: grr: Please remove dependency on prelink

2017-05-29 Thread Sascha Steinbiss
Dear Geoffrey,

thanks for your email.

> I'm the current maintainer of prelink in Debian. The tool is pretty
> unloved upstream -- Fedora, where I get sources from, has removed it
> entirely in Fedora 23, and the latest release tarball isn't even in the
> usual place -- so there's a decent chance that prelink will leave Debian
> at some point in the next release cycle.

While it's indeed sad that upstream's support is in decline, that's good
to know.

> It looks like grr only uses prelink to un-prelink things, and that
> entire code is conditional on whether /usr/sbin/prelink exists. If I'm
> reading this right, that means there's no need to install prelink on the
> machines of people who install grr -- no binaries on their machines will
> be prelinked, so there's no need to un-prelink anything. So prelink
> doesn't need to be a dependency: grr will do the right thing if it's
> installed, but will skip over that code if it's not.

Taking a closer look at the code, it seems that un-prelinking is done
during the post-installation step of customizing (i.e. patching) a set
of binary templates (e.g. from [1]) which are later to be deployed to
GRR clients via the server.
The problem here is that, in case 'prelink' cannot be executed for a
binary, the binary in question will be skipped completely and will not
be available from the GRR server. During my test in a amd64 stretch VM,
this was -- at least -- happening to the Linux RPM templates. So if
prelink is not available during runtime (in particular during the time
'grr_config_updater initialize' is run) then client binaries for some
platforms WILL be missing in the GRR installation.

It would be interesting to see whether this un-prelinking is actually
necessary. The relevant code in grr/lib/build.py states that:

  # Undo all prelinking for libs or the rpm might have checksum
  # mismatches.

but it would need some more testing to see if and how this would impact
regular use. Any suggestions?

Cheers
Sascha

[1] https://packages.debian.org/sid/utils/grr-client-templates



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Bug#863295: grr: Please remove dependency on prelink

2017-05-24 Thread Geoffrey Thomas

Package: grr-server
Version: 3.1.0.2+dfsg-2
Severity: wishlist

Hi!

I'm the current maintainer of prelink in Debian. The tool is pretty 
unloved upstream -- Fedora, where I get sources from, has removed it 
entirely in Fedora 23, and the latest release tarball isn't even in the 
usual place -- so there's a decent chance that prelink will leave Debian 
at some point in the next release cycle.


It looks like grr only uses prelink to un-prelink things, and that entire 
code is conditional on whether /usr/sbin/prelink exists. If I'm reading 
this right, that means there's no need to install prelink on the machines 
of people who install grr -- no binaries on their machines will be 
prelinked, so there's no need to un-prelink anything. So prelink doesn't 
need to be a dependency: grr will do the right thing if it's installed, 
but will skip over that code if it's not.


If that's correct, can you remove prelink from your Depends: line 
(whenever you next do an upload, no urgency)? That will avoid more people 
having prelink installed than necessary, and make it easier to remove 
prelink from Debian in the future.


Thanks,
--
Geoffrey Thomas
https://ldpreload.com
geo...@ldpreload.com