On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:51 PM Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 2:11 PM William Roberts > <bill.c.roberts@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:59 PM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 7:31 PM <william.c.roberts@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: William Roberts <william.c.roberts@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > The text above states that kernel-devel is needed, but it's missing from > > > > the dnf command. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: William Roberts <william.c.roberts@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > README.md | 3 ++- > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/README.md b/README.md > > > > index 1f7e5d92a100..a73e9cc0c06d 100644 > > > > --- a/README.md > > > > +++ b/README.md > > > > @@ -77,7 +77,8 @@ following command: > > > > kernel-devel \ > > > > > > It's actually right there already ^^ > > > > Yeah that's the foot cannon, I thought I was good, but you need the > > specific ones > > as Ondrej pointed out to me. > > > > > > > > > quota \ > > > > xfsprogs-devel \ > > > > - libuuid-devel > > > > + libuuid-devel \ > > > > + kernel-devel-$(uname -r) > > > > > > I proposed adding the -$(uname -r) before, but there were some valid > > > counterarguments. See the discussion here: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/CAFqZXNs5jcOOnhzT8=DQgzaf9RtBZ1=oqTU83pjVLMqPb-rzHA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > > > Arguments for why the dnf command should have it with uname: > > 1. We tried to add it twice, it's bit people twice. > > 2. The README states "On a modern Fedora system you can install these > > dependencies with the following command:" > > - which is wrong, you need the specific package > > - If you're going to provide a "dnf install" or a apt-get install, > > it should just work > > - the apt-get example has uname -r in it. > > - so the precludes building your own kernel, if you do that as > > Paul stated, you're on your own. (lore comment) > > I'm ok with adding it. Does anyone want to ack this one? Ok I found another one, kernel-modules-extra is needed for the sctp module. The tests expect sctp support, should we conditionally skip these if sctp is not enabled? Whats the best way of checking for that proto if we want this? just an ls of /proc/sys/net: ls /proc/sys/net/ bridge core ipv4 ipv6 netfilter nf_conntrack_max sctp unix
