Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 03:43:50 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/rc.d Makefile auditd Message-ID: <20060305033756.F26563@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20060305032121.GA41875@flame.pc> References: <200602021002.k12A2u0u067172@repoman.freebsd.org> <43E2A089.7020202@FreeBSD.org> <20060305032121.GA41875@flame.pc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 5 Mar 2006, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >> I have a couple concerns about this. First the more general, I'm not sure >> that /etc/security is a reasonable place for your config files. That's a >> very general name, and the audit stuff is a very specific project. That >> said, I'm not sure that we need yet another directory under /etc, but I'm >> curious about what others think about this issue. > > Should we also add a $FreeBSD$ id line to these scripts to ease merging any > local changes with mergemaster? By scripts, I assume you mean files generally, since only one file in /etc/security is actually a script. Right now, those files are on the vendor branch in contrib/openbsm/etc, since they are distributed as part of OpenBSM. I think merging $FreeBSD$ strings into the OpenBSM distribution probably doesn't make sense. So it comes down to how and whether we want to maintain local modifications (such as adding $FreeBSD$). My hope has been to avoid requiring any FreeBSD src changes to files in OpenBSM, given that I am the vendor, and can loop changes back, but obviously $FreeBSD$ is a bit of a special case. How do we normally handle this sort of thing? It looks like for OpenSSL and OpenSSH, at least, we opt to take files off the vendor branch? Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060305033756.F26563>