Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 02:40:27 -0800 (PST) From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com> Cc: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: So, AGAIN, why was tcpdump moved? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003310231400.95920-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200003310828.AAA02707@windsor.research.att.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 31 Mar 2000, Bill Fenner wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, why is there an "AGAIN" in the subject line,
> since this is the first email I've gotten on the subject?
First I've heard about it too.
> It didn't occur to me that this would change where tcpdump lived
> (i.e. it seemed like libcrypto was part of FreeBSD) so it wasn't an
> explicit choice on my part to move distributions. I agree that's a bad
> side effect. It's easy to disable the decrypting-ESP feature if the
> disadvantage of having it is greater than the advantage.
AFAIK there were two versions built, one which ends up in the bin
distribution and one in the crypto distribution (I believe ppp also does
this to take advantage of crypto support if it's available). Both versions
of tcpdump are built from the same place (usr.sbin/tcpdump where it's
always been), and so theres no need to have two separate copies of the
build infrastructure (e.g. the proposed extra one in secure/).
There *were* several problems with the .ifdefs in the tcpdump makefile
which I fixed prior to 4.0, and I thought I had fixed the problem of
tcpdump in the bin distribution being linked against libcrypto (this was
broken in the initial 4.0 Release but fixed when jkh rereleased it). If I
screwed something up I apologise - I didn't test the outcome of a full
make release.
I just looked at the makefile again - am I misinterpreting the following:
.if exists(../../../secure) && !defined(NOCRYPT) && !defined(NOSECURE) && \
!defined(NO_OPENSSL) && !defined(RELEASE_CRUNCH)
DISTRIBUTION=crypto
...
.endif
which I interpret as saying "if we're building release and making the bin
distribution (NOCRYPT) then don't build the crypto stuff, and leave us in
the bin distribution, but if we're not building NOCRYPT then put us in the
crypto distribution and build the extra bits". This is the same thing
usr.sbin/ppp does as far as I can see (it was copied directly from
there). What did I miss?
Kris
----
In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate.
-- Charles Forsythe <forsythe@alum.mit.edu>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0003310231400.95920-100000>