[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 07:45:25 +0200 (CEST)
From: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, keescook@...omium.org
cc: Mrinal Pandey <mrinalmni@...il.com>, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
Linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com,
re.emese@...il.com, maennich@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts: Add intended executable mode and SPDX license
On Sun, 30 Aug 2020, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 14:54:05 +0530 Mrinal Pandey <mrinalmni@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > commit b72231eb7084 ("scripts: add spdxcheck.py self test") added the file
> > spdxcheck-test.sh to the repository without the executable flag and license
> > information.
>
> The x bit shouldn't matter.
>
> If someone downloads and applies patch-5.9.xz (which is a supported way
> of obtaining a kernel) then patch(1) will erase the x bit anyway.
>
Andrew, Kees,
thanks for the feedback.
As his mentor, I see two valuable tasks for Mrinal to work on:
1. Document this knowledge how scripts should be called, not relying on
the executable bit, probably best somewhere here:
./Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst, a new section on using dedicated
scripts in chapter 3 ("The kbuild files").
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/makefiles.html#the-kbuild-files
2. Determine if there are places in the build Makefiles that do rely on
the executable bit and fix those script invocations. (Kees' idea of remove
all executable bits and see...)
Lukas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
