The systemd USE=gcrypt description says... "Enable sealing of journal files using gcrypt" ... which I don't care about, so I have it turned off. But I was just checking my journald output, and I see this (I /thought/ DNSSEC was enabled): DNSSEC option cannot be enabled or set to allow-downgrade when systemd-resolved is built without gcrypt support. Turning off DNSSEC support. So at least as of systemd-239 (which I had just installed last night and this was one of my first boots off of, thus the journalctl check), systemd needs gcrypt for systemd-resolved's DNSSEC support as well. Since it's arguably more likely people will want systemd-resolved DNSSEC than sealed journals, IMO the description for USE=gcrypt should be changed to mention (systemd-)resolved and DNSSEC. [Set to enhancement severity as I guess that's what it is. Maybe there should be a documentation severity choice too? Arguably that'd be a better fit if it were an option.]
Bump. Nearing four years with no action beyond initial bug assignment for a USE flag description modification?
(In reply to Duncan from comment #1) > Bump. Nearing four years with no action beyond initial bug assignment for a > USE flag description modification? Asking for a status update is fine. The attitude is rude.
The situation is more complex today. systemd can utilize either gcrypt or openssl for DNSSEC. There are several systemd components affected by these two optional dependencies. Describing exactly what gets affected would require some careful analysis of the build system. Patches welcome.
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=0a5ac31c81194d05674ee7961f6865ff35f59497 commit 0a5ac31c81194d05674ee7961f6865ff35f59497 Author: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2022-05-10 05:09:15 +0000 Commit: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2022-05-10 05:09:15 +0000 sys-apps/systemd: update USE flag descriptions The gcrypt and openssl USE flags affect multiple components in systemd. Replace the overly-specific description for 'gcrypt' with a more generic one to reflect this. Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/659036 Signed-off-by: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> sys-apps/systemd/metadata.xml | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
(In reply to Mike Gilbert from comment #2) > (In reply to Duncan from comment #1) > > Bump. Nearing four years with no action beyond initial bug assignment for a > > USE flag description modification? > > Asking for a status update is fine. The attitude is rude. Apologies then. Rude wasn't intended. That was simply my natural somewhat shocked reaction to seeing a clearly simple no-nasty-side-effects-to-worry-about bug everyone including me had clearly forgotten about for four years... still open after all that time. But looking at it as if it were me on the other side, I imagine I'd be a bit sensitive to the time bit too so I should have either omitted that bit entirely or alternatively stated clearly (in the bump, not only in this reply) that I had forgotten about it myself and I realized everyone had and that it simply fell thru the cracks. Maybe I can remember than next time. Meanwhile, again, apologies at how it came across; rude wasn't intended.
