Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make syscollector capable to fetch the PYPI and node packages #6346

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Aug 24, 2023

Conversation

GabrielEValenzuela
Copy link
Member

Description

This PR closes #6342 by adding documentation about new package scanner support of syscollector (wazuh/wazuh#5443).

Checks

Docs building

  • Compiles without warnings.

Code formatting and web optimization

  • Uses three spaces indentation.
  • Adds or updates meta descriptions accordingly.
  • Updates the redirects.js script if necessary (check this guide).

Writing style

  • Uses present tense, active voice, and semi-formal registry.
  • Uses short, simple sentences.
  • Uses bold for user interface elements, italics for key terms or emphasis, and code font for Bash commands, file names, REST paths, and code.

@GabrielEValenzuela GabrielEValenzuela marked this pull request as ready for review August 15, 2023 14:36
@GabrielEValenzuela GabrielEValenzuela self-assigned this Aug 15, 2023
Copy link
Member

@pereyra-m pereyra-m left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Gj!

Fix link PyPI
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+
| macOS | √ | √ |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+
| FreeBSD | ✗ | ✗ |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are we sure that freebsd and solaris do not have support for those package managers?

@javimed
Copy link
Member

javimed commented Aug 16, 2023

Some questions and comments:

Why a limited list of package formats? Why not having the full list of packages including already supported plus these newly supported formats?

The specific table for the package scan could simply be a two-columns table: First column listing supported operating systems and second column with an enumeration of supported package formats such as deb, rpm, pacman, npm, pypi for Linux, pkg, npm, pypi for macOS, and .pkg for Solaris or whatever the case. Or perhaps using the very compatibility table but instead of using the generic √ and ✗ marks we would fill those cells with the package enumeration...

What about updating the Available inventory fields?

imagen

I think we have to update the enumerated formats there too because this version has a broader reach. We could even enumerate here once again all the supported packages, if this were possible.

What do you think about providing a list of all the supported package formats everywhere where it's required?

Copy link
Member

@matias-braida matias-braida left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

GJ

Add packages support in available-inventory-fields.

The Syscollector module now supports scan packages from `NPM (Node Package Manager) <https://www.npmjs.com/>`_ and `PyPI (Python Package Index) <https://pypi.org/>`_, **the support is only for the default paths of those packages' installation**.

The following table shows the new feature that are compatible with various operating systems.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we are talking about "the new feature" I think it should be "...is compatible..."

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree :)

Comment on lines 38 to 51
| | NPM | PyPI | rpm | deb | pacman | pkg | .pkg |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+-----------------+------------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Windows | √ | √ | – | – | – | – | – |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+-----------------+------------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Linux | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | – |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+-----------------+------------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| macOS | √ | √ | – | – | – | – | – |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+-----------------+------------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| FreeBSD | √ | √ | – | – | – | – | – |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+-----------------+------------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| OpenBSD | √ | √ | – | – | – | – | – |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+-----------------+------------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Solaris | √ | √ | – | – | – | – | √ |
+------------------------+----------------------+-----------------+-----------------+------------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't understand why ".pkg" and FreeBSD also uses pkg package manager, Although I think they are different package manager that share the same name.
image

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch ! Fix it !

Copy link
Member

@MiguelazoDS MiguelazoDS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some concerns

Copy link
Member

@pereyra-m pereyra-m left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@javimed javimed self-requested a review August 22, 2023 15:38
@Dwordcito Dwordcito merged commit c55ceb0 into 4.7.0 Aug 24, 2023
@Dwordcito Dwordcito deleted the dev-6342-add-documentation-npm-pipy branch August 24, 2023 13:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Documentation improvements Documentation improvements level/subtask Subtask issue module/syscollector type/enhancement Enhancement issue
Projects
No open projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Make syscollector capable to fetch the PYPI and node packages from the machine - Documentation changes
6 participants