Bug 42417 – New Packets: APG and librand, ebuilds attached

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

[Description red0x 2004-02-21 14:31:53 UTC]

The autosec just released two new projects: APG and librand.
APG is the advanced password generator, and librand is a library implementation of the Mersenne Twister PRNG.  Ebuild have been attached for entry into portage.

app-admin/APG/APG-0.3.ebuild
dev-libs/librand/librand-0.2.ebuild

[Comment 1 red0x 2004-02-21 14:32:41 UTC]

Created attachment 26067 [details]
librand-0.2.ebuild

[Comment 2 red0x 2004-02-21 14:32:58 UTC]

Created attachment 26068 [details]
APG-0.3.ebuild

[Comment 3 Seemant Kulleen (RETIRED) 2004-03-07 20:21:16 UTC]

hardened team: y'all want this?

[Comment 4 solar (RETIRED) 2004-03-07 22:18:17 UTC]

Gentoo needs a crypto herd.

[Comment 5 red0x 2004-03-07 23:07:05 UTC]

need a volunteer to head it up?

[Comment 6 solar (RETIRED) 2004-03-09 20:34:06 UTC]

volunteers are always welcome. If you would like to talk about the 
creation of such a herd stop by #gentoo-hardened on freenode and
perhaps share some ideas.

For sure I would want to see openssl, mhash, librand and the likes 
grouped into such a beast. It would be nice to have a semi central
authority of cryptographic and entropy related efforts at gentoo.

[Comment 7 red0x 2004-05-21 01:21:56 UTC]

Anything happenning on this ebuild? I'd like to see it in portage if possible.

[Comment 8 solar (RETIRED) 2004-05-21 04:30:55 UTC]

red0x,
few comments.

RESTRICT="nomirror" <-- why do we need to do this for both .ebuilds when they are both marked as having a licence of GPL-2

KEYWORDS="x86"
New ebuilds never get introduced as x86

In src_install() both .ebuilds rm -rf stuff in ${D}/usr/share/${PN} (Why?)

Both .ebuilds inherit gcc eutils (Why?)

[Comment 9 red0x 2004-05-21 07:46:04 UTC]

I used some other ebuilds as references when writing these ebuilds, feel free to change things that don't make sense.

[Comment 10 solar (RETIRED) 2004-05-21 16:35:57 UTC]

red0x,

Seeing as your the one that want's this support in portage I'd suggest 
that you clean vs dumping that on the devs. After you clean it up your
still going to find a dev that actually has a use for this stuff. I
don't have a use/need/desire so I'm personaly pretty unsure about me
adding them to the tree.

Maybe somebody else does? (like a crypto herd [hint,hint])

[Comment 11 red0x 2004-05-23 19:27:49 UTC]

Yeah, I'll change it, no problem.  I just figured that you know more about what this stuff means, and that they are all easy one liners.  If you are that busy, I'll fix them up sometime tonight and post new ones. :)

[Comment 12 red0x 2004-06-07 18:44:12 UTC]

Created attachment 32899 [details]
librand-0.2.ebuild

[Comment 13 red0x 2004-06-07 18:45:19 UTC]

Comment on attachment 32899 [details]
librand-0.2.ebuild

Forgot the ~x86, but that is only change needed. ;)

[Comment 14 red0x 2004-06-07 18:49:51 UTC]

Created attachment 32900 [details]
librand-0.2.ebuild

Look, this one works, I promise.  Sorry about the last one, it was bunk.

[Comment 15 red0x 2004-06-07 18:52:10 UTC]

Created attachment 32901 [details]
APG-0.3.ebuild

Fixed up APG ebuild.

[Comment 16 solar (RETIRED) 2004-06-10 13:10:48 UTC]

red0x, 
I'm going to bounce this back to bug-wranglers@ so your .ebuilds don't hit the hardened graveyard, maybe somebody else will want to maintain these.

[Comment 17 Robin Johnson 2004-07-20 20:12:22 UTC]

there is already a app-admin/apg in the tree, and I (personally) believe it's a lot more useful than your APG, as I use it at least once a week at work.

solar: i'd be game to be a member of the crypto herd, as I handle libmcrypt,libmhash and a number of the entropy packages in the tree.

[Comment 18 Daniel Black (RETIRED) 2004-08-15 08:29:41 UTC]

crypto herd exists!

[Comment 19 red0x 2004-08-15 10:12:48 UTC]

Ah, there is already an apg in the tree.  Someone beat me to it, and did a better job.  ;)  I guess I will close this bug then.