Re: audit 2.3.6 released

On Sunday, April 13, 2014 11:51:45 AM Burn Alting wrote: > A patch is attached that addresses this. > > Essentially the modification > - notices if we identify an audit.log file to use but we do not find the > recorded audit event in that log file and so report an error (to stderr) > and return a new exit code (12) > - allows checkpointing to only use the recorded time from the checkpoint > file for comparisons. I'd like to look at these two pieces separately. Let's have 1 bug/feature per patch. This way if something looks good, it can be applied immediately. Whereas if something needs more discussion, it would block application of the part that is good. > You will note that the patch also contains changes to swig/audit.py. > Although this file is automatically generated, it is part of the 2.3.6 > release ... should it be? I suppose it should be. What is in the release is decided by automake/autoconf. If there are any mistakes in the Makefile.am file, I would take a patch. > I also note that a lot of Makefile.in's are also part of the release. Again, > should these automatically generated files be part of the release? The audit package release is done by a script that pretty much does the following (its way more complicated than this, but this is the essential pieces): mkdir audit cd audit svn co http://svn.fedorahosted.org/svn/audit/trunk . ./autogen.sh ./configure make -j 8 distcheck If it finishes saying it created the tar ball, I send it to rawhide to make sure it builds on a current OS. If that is also successful, then I push it to my people page and then commit a branch in svn. I also run the development audit package on all my systems during the whole development cycle to make sure bugs are fixed, nothing new shows up, and its builds under normal conditions. So, anything that is there, is because autotools think it should be there unless I made a mistake in a Makefile.am. :-) Patches are welcome. Thanks, -Steve