Following on from a discussion on the distro package dev list, we will 
require a distro specific root CA certs file for OpenJDK/IcedTea when it 
reaches a point that I deem 'stable' (see "OT" below sig).   
Unfortunately, we also need a populated certs file now for gnome keyring 
in 2.24.3.  We have one from OpenSSL and one from Mozilla.  I'm 
considering using the currently shipping file from mozilla.org as 
outlined here: 

http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=270

and here:

http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/ca-certificates/F-10/mkcabundle.pl?revision=1.1

Currently we have two usable installed in BLFS (mozilla and openssl).  
Now I believe that I already have a workable solution as I wrote this 
e-mail, but we do have two options for piggy backing off of another 
distro. 

Debian provides a nice package including mozilla.org cacerts along with 
additional government and free providers (brazil.gov.br, cacert.org, 
debconf.org, mozilla.org, quovadis.bm, signet.pl, spi-inc.org, 
telesec.de).  IMO, the RH method is sufficient to explain the issue and 
users can add what they like, but Debian does a really nice job of 
breaking out all the providers individually in 
/usr/share/ca-certificates and combining them in /etc for system use.  
So new question:

Where, which method, and how does it go into the book?  Again, I think 
that the RH method is sufficient, but others may disagree.  I'm thinking 
that the RH script goes into auxfiles along with a generated 
ca-bundle.crt for the book, a new page and file written for xinclude in 
packages that can utilize it (such as openssl, gnome-keyring, and JDK 
off the top of my head) and the generated file placed with other BLFS 
provided files (like bootscripts and mozconfig and the like). 

Finally, one other issue that I stumbled across when researching this.  
OpenSSL gets money from providers to include their cert in the source 
distribution.  Would we be doing a disservice to their devs to suggest 
using another source.  Obviously not if using certs from a not for 
profit organization, but I _think_ that would exclude the use of the 
Mozilla provided certs.  Comments, corrections, suggestions, other 
explanations?

-- DJ Lucas

OT:  OpenJDK/IcedTea--IMO, a stable release is at least after another 
Sun release of OpenJDK, including the official plugin and WebStart as 
the current open source offerings are not sufficient for my own daily use.


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to