[pkg-wpa-devel] Debian 2.6.32 CONFIG_WIRELESS_OLD_REGULATORY, wireless-regdb and crda

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Kel Modderman <kel at otaku42.de> wrote:
>>> On Thursday 04 February 2010 11:42:33 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Paul Wise <pabs at debian.org> wrote:
>>>> > On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 09:58 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> I can help with this only if no one else is up for it. I personally
>>>> >> however find building a key on the fly for each build pretty pointless
>>>> >> and would like to know if a package would be acceptable upstream on
>>>> >> Debian if OpenSSL is used to allow administrators to add their own
>>>> >> keys into the /etc/wireless-regdb/pubkeys/ dir for CRDA and from the
>>>> >> start only trust John's key.
>>>> >
>>>> > As part of upstream, you're probably the best person to do the packaging
>>>> > stuff for Debian.
>>>>
>>>> OK, in that case here is my first shot at this.
>>>>
>>>> http://wireless.kernel.org/download/wireless-regdb/debs/
>>>> http://wireless.kernel.org/download/crda/debs/
>>>>
>>>> Tim -- notice both packages have a Replaces: wireless-crda. If debian
>>>> upstreams both packages then I think it would be good to separate the
>>>> packages as I am recommending for integration on Debian and for Ubuntu
>>>> to also use the same debian packages as debian. I think this would
>>>> mean also having the new Ubuntu kernels depend on these new packages
>>>> instead of the old wireless-crda.
>>>>
>>>> The package is very simple, I took what I could from Kel's work but
>>>> did leave in the signature check stuff, used openssl and also just
>>>> used cdbs. The wireless-regdb does not change *that* often so I do not
>>>> expect debian itself to need a custom regulatory database to be
>>>> automatically built and propagated so I left all the watch stuff out
>>>> and can do manual updates for now, I can commit to that for now. If
>>>> that is a requirement however, I am not that familiar with new package
>>>> policies and am unclear how to do that. I would prefer if we can get
>>>> something started and uploaded for now which at least meets the
>>>> requirements for integration into an eventual stable release, but
>>>> that's just me.
>>>>
>>>> Please review and let me know what you think.
>>>
>>> These demonstrate that most of what I've attempted to explain about the
>>> difficulties of getting this software into the Debian software pool in a
>>> maintainable form has been taken lightly.
>>>
>>> To reiterate what I think is most important:
>>> The software should be built from its preferable form of modification to
>>> produce the resulting binary.
>>
>> What's the point?
>>
>>> This helps to make the source package available
>>> to other developers to modify and rebuild without invasive packaging changes.
>>
>> The source will always be available and users can themselves apt-get
>> source wireless-regdb and compile their own regdb at any time, just as
>> with CRDA.
>
> I've given this some more thought and while I think it is simply brain
> dead to require a build from source to produce a binary with exactly
> the same output except the signature I understand that asking for an
> exception to rule on Debian based on common sense is still likely more
> difficult to address than doing the temporary key thing and building
> CRDA and wireless-regdb together as Fedora does.
>
> I'll give that a shot next on my next break.

And after reviewing this again, I conclude Kel already did all the
work :) So any mentors / DDs willing to take his package up?

I think its at:

dget -ux http://sidux.net/kelmo/sidux/crap/crda/crda_1.1.1-1.dsc

  Luis