Re: [Design] Re: The new minstall fails...

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Sam Sgro wrote:

> First off, there are two "types" of kernel/module building targets: *mod, *go.

Perhaps the go target can be renamed into something like static?

> "make oldmod" is to be used when we intend to compile KLIPS as module; "make

Somewhere between 1.97-1.98b this behaviour changed. I always did oldgo, because I believed it was intended for the kernel's oldconfig, and at first had to manually change the built process from Y to M in the kernel .config. At some point this changed, possible when we started to build redhat packages? Also, I find the references to 'old'rather confusing. It sounds like the old way of doing things. A better name would be something like 'redo' or 'recompile'

> The appropriate way to install FreeS/WAN after oldgo: kinstall. After oldmod,

Perhaps use static-install (sinstall?) as an alias? I'd personaly like to see the default target contain some more hints for the impatient, such as:

Please read doc/intro.html or INSTALL before running make

Do you need help?

In addition to our free technical library, Pantek provides professional IT services to companies who utilize Open Source software: Learn more about Pantek's Technical Support offerings Place an order for 24/7/365 Technical Support here Learn more about Pantek, who we are, and what we do Chat with a Live Operator Related lists.freeswan.org Links 1998-fall 1998-spring 1998-summer 1998-winter 1999-winter announce briefs bugs design freeswan-list hipsec ietf-sectest users users-admin Request more information about Pantek

To built ipsec as a kernel module, issue 'make oldmod;make minstall' To built ipsec staticly into the kernel, issue 'make oldmod;make kinstall'

Also, I am not sure about kinstall. In the old days, when everyone used the same bootloader setup, this worked fine, but these days there no longer seems to be a standard. Perhaps we should have 'newbie'support for modules, but leave out the install target for a custom replacement kernel?

> As oldgo is not defaulting to static IPSEC compilation, is it broken, or is
 

>From the practical pont of view, I believe modules should be the default.
>From a security paranoia point of view, there should be no module support
on a security gateway. My personal view is that we should keep modules the default target,and leave the levels of paranoia to each individual. But I do think we should rename some of the built targets.

Paul