Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rename the module binary to just pkcs11.so #108

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 19, 2022
Merged

Conversation

simo5
Copy link
Member

@simo5 simo5 commented Nov 17, 2022

It is a little bit silly to name a provider something-provider, and other openssl providers just use their name.so (for examnple tpm2.so), so let's do the same for the pkcs11 provider and install it propoerly under /libdir/ossl-modules/pkcs11.so as expected by openssl provider distribution standards.

Also add a dstribution check CI tests, that runs make distcheck and builds an rpm from the spec file

@simo5 simo5 force-pushed the so_rename branch 8 times, most recently from c4bc1d1 to 4ce8f21 Compare November 17, 2022 20:33
Copy link
Collaborator

@holger-dengler holger-dengler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me.

packaging/pkcs11-provider.spec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packaging/pkcs11-provider.spec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/distcheck.yml Show resolved Hide resolved
It is a little bit silly to name a provider something-provider, and
other openssl providers just use their name.so (for examnple tpm2.so),
so let's do the same for the pkcs11 provider and install it propoerly
under /libdir/ossl-modules/pkcs11.so as expected by openssl provider
distribution standards.

Signed-off-by: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>
Given debian has diffeent libdir directories, better check distcheck
there as well.

As part of this job seaprate build and distcheck jobs as we do not need
the pkcs11 drivers testing matrix for distchecking

Signed-off-by: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>
@simo5
Copy link
Member Author

simo5 commented Nov 18, 2022

@Jakuje rpmbuild seem to work too, can you approve (or disapprove if you think the test is not good) this PR ?

@simo5 simo5 merged commit 1db301c into latchset:main Nov 19, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants