[Buildroot] crda and m2crypto
dimitris at siganos.org
Fri Feb 8 10:58:09 UTC 2013
On 08/02/13 10:17, Gustavo Zacarias wrote:
> On 02/08/2013 06:03 AM, Dimitrios Siganos wrote:
>> I am integrating crda with buildroot and I have run into a problem that
>> I'd like some feedback on.
> Any particular reason you don't want the static db integrated in the kernel?
> Basically copy db.txt from wireless-regdb to linux-*/net/wireless/db.txt
> and enable CONFIG_CFG80211_INTERNAL_REGDB=y.
> Bam! No need for CRDA and all that.
> Making a kernel extension for this should be relatively simple, or
> alternatively just provide a patch for the kernel you're using.
There is no particular reason for going with crda other than it is the
recommended way. I am a consultant working a with a module provider who
provides modules to third parties. The third parties make the final call
on everything but we want to deliver the recommended setup by default.
For us, as a business, bypassing the HOST_DIR and forcing the user to
install python-m2crypto is an acceptable solution. This is a nice
example that shows why upstreaming is sometimes not a simple matter
because of differing priorities between upstream/downstream.
We would like to work closer with buildroot so I'll make an effort to
upstream these changes. I have had a look at m2crypto and it seems
simple enough to integrate with buildroot. However, m2crypto now needs
If I fail to integrate m2crypto and dependencies within a reasonable
amount of time, I will go to plan to B. There seems to exist an easy
alternative. The key files produced are not likely to change because
they are the C representation of the public key that guarantees the
authenticity of the data. So I could just add to them to the buildroot
package to remove the need to build them and hence not need m2crypto.
>From Thomas' reply, it sounds like that would be an acceptable workaround.
But for now, I will attempt to bring in m2crypto and dependencies as a
More information about the buildroot