[lfs-dev] libcap vs libcap-ng

Armin K. krejzi at email.com
Fri Oct 24 14:19:59 PDT 2014


On 24.10.2014 22:23, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I notice that util-linux searches for libcap-ng (last release 0.7.4, 30
> April 2014) in order to build setpriv.
>
> I've never used setpriv:
>
> "Sets or queries various Linux privilege settings that are inherited
> across execve(2)."
>
> I don't know how useful that is, but we should probably build it if we can.
>
> Does anyone know if libcap-ng is a drop-in replacement for libcap?
>

I don't think so. It provides a different library (libcap-ng.so) while 
other packages explicitly look for libcap.so. I build it for util-linux 
and gnome-keyring packages.

> ------
>
> In a related matter, util-linux's configure does the right thing with
>
> ./configure ADJTIME_PATH=/var/lib/hwclock/adjtime \
>              --docdir=/usr/share/doc/util-linux-2.25.2
>
> but it gives some warnings.  I can avoid the warnings with:
>
> /configure \
>    --without-systemd \
>    --without-systemdsystemunitdir \
>    --without-python \
>    --disable-chfn-chsh \
>    --disable-login \
>    --disable-su \
>    --disable-setpriv \
>    --disable-runuser \
>    --disable-pylibmount
>
> Is that worthwhile?
>

I don't think it matters much, after all they are just warnings about 
optional packages not found. But, it may be useful to include some of 
these so some programs provided by other packages are not overriden by 
this one when upgrading the package and the optional dep is present for 
certain feature. 4th, 5th and 6th line come to my mind as they would 
overwrite utils provided by shadow if PAM is present when you rebuild 
(upgrade) util-linux.

>    -- Bruce
>


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list