On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:40:11AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote: > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 08:30:37PM +0100, René Hummen wrote: > > On 30.01.2012, at 12:41, Diego Biurrun wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 07:09:32PM +0100, René Hummen wrote: > > >> On 25.01.2012, at 16:14, Fahad Aizaz wrote: > > >>> Fahad Aizaz has proposed merging lp:~fahad-aizaz/hipl/hip-cert-conf > > >>> into lp:hipl. > > >>> > > >>> --- hipd/init.c 2011-12-13 13:50:53 +0000 > > >>> +++ hipd/init.c 2012-01-25 15:13:34 +0000 > > >>> @@ -465,81 +435,6 @@ > > >>> > > >>> -/* Needed if the configuration file for certs did not exist */ > > >>> -#define HIP_CERT_INIT_DAYS 10 > > >> > > >> ... and once we are on it, we can also use this define instead of > > >> the parameter in the configuration file. This change would make > > >> hip_cert.conf obsolete. > > > > > > How can build-time configuration make run-time configuration obsolete? > > > > The generated configuration file is only used by the test application > > certteststub. My thought: Is it really necessary to offer run-time > > configuration support by means of a config file for a test > > application? I especially ask this question seeing that the current > > certificate code neither allows signaling of certificates between two > > instances of the hipd nor verification of certificates by the hipfw. > > In my opinion, having a config file for this specific test stub is > > overkill and the removal of the code responsible for reading and > > parsing the config file would enable us to further shrink the HIPL > > codebase. > > OK, I understand what you mean now and agree in full - let's remove this > config file and its reading code. Note that there will still be three > other ways of dealing with config files left afterwards... Fahad can you tackle this? Diego