Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
Hi Balint, On 16/11/2023 18:55, Bálint Réczey wrote: Hi Colin, Colin King (gmail) ezt írta (időpont: 2023. nov. 16., Cs, 17:46): Hi Balint, Since libtypec installs include files and libs to the standard locations actually there is no need to set those paths. I think I would use the following patch: --- a/libtypec.pc.in +++ b/libtypec.pc.in @@ -1,12 +1,9 @@ prefix=/usr exec_prefix=/usr -libdir=${exec_prefix}/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -includedir=${prefix}/ Name: libtypec Description: USB-Type C and USB Power Delivery class devices Version: 0.4.0 Requires: -Libs: -L${libdir} -llibtypec -Cflags: -I${includedir} +Libs: -llibtypec I think this patch application did not work out as intended, please check the patched file. The symbols file's first line is also still off and now the symbos have debian package revisions. Those are issues automatically detected by Lintian. I suggest running lintian on the built binary packages' .changes file or populating the packaging repository on Salsa where CI runs include lintian and many other checks. I ran lintian but I didn't see the errors, I used: lintian --profile=debian --pedantic libtypec_0.4-3_source.changes perhaps there are some extra lintian flags or config settings that I'm missing. Any suggestions? Colin Cheers, Balint Ah, good idea. I've refreshed package with this change. Also updated the .symbols file and uploaded a -4 to mentors. Colin
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
Hi Balint, Since libtypec installs include files and libs to the standard locations actually there is no need to set those paths. I think I would use the following patch: --- a/libtypec.pc.in +++ b/libtypec.pc.in @@ -1,12 +1,9 @@ prefix=/usr exec_prefix=/usr -libdir=${exec_prefix}/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -includedir=${prefix}/ Name: libtypec Description: USB-Type C and USB Power Delivery class devices Version: 0.4.0 Requires: -Libs: -L${libdir} -llibtypec -Cflags: -I${includedir} +Libs: -llibtypec Ah, good idea. I've refreshed package with this change. Also updated the .symbols file and uploaded a -4 to mentors. Colin
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
Hi again Balint, On 16/11/2023 11:35, Bálint Réczey wrote: Hi Colin, Thanks for the quick response. Please check my other observations, too, in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1041327#58 You mentioned: "The .pc file is now at the right location, but contains multiarch strings which will differ across architectures. I suggest hardcoding the paths in the patch." I'm not quite sure what is incorrect here, this file is patched already via debian/patches/0001-fix-libtypec-libdir.patch For an i386 build, the .pc file in usr/share/pkgconfig contains: prefix=/usr exec_prefix=/usr libdir=${exec_prefix}/lib/i386-linux-gnu includedir=${prefix}/include/i386-linux-gnu .. For a x86-64 build, the .pc file in usr/share/pkgconfig contains: prefix=/usr exec_prefix=/usr libdir=${exec_prefix}/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu includedir=${prefix}/include/x86_64-linux-gnu .. For an arm64 build, the .pc file in usr/share/pkgconfig contains: prefix=/usr exec_prefix=/usr libdir=${exec_prefix}/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu includedir=${prefix}/include/aarch64-linux-gnu .. ..so I'm a bit confused. Do you mind clarifying for me. Colin
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
On 15/11/2023 13:47, Bálint Réczey wrote: Hi Colin, There are a few upstream source files licensed under GPL. Please update debian/copyright to cover all the used licenses. Updated and uploaded -3 to mentors Thanks for the prompt review feedback. Much appreciated. Colin You can run 'cme update dpkg-copyright' in the source directory or any other tool from https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools <https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools> to help with the manual labor. Cheers, Balint On 2023. Nov 15., Wed at 10:27, Bálint Réczey <mailto:bal...@balintreczey.hu>> wrote: Hi Colin, Colin King (gmail) mailto:colin.i.k...@gmail.com>> ezt írta (időpont: 2023. nov. 14., K, 17:58): > > Hi Balint, > > I've uploaded 0.4.0-2 with the suggested fixes. > > reply inlined below: > > On 09/11/2023 16:23, Bálint Réczey wrote: > > Hi Colin, > > > > Colin King (gmail) mailto:colin.i.k...@gmail.com>> ezt írta (időpont: 2023. > > nov. 7., K, 15:18): > >> > >> Hi Balint, > >> > >> Thanks for responding with the review. I was waiting for the upstream > >> project to release a 0.4 with some minor fixes before re-uploading to > >> mentors. > >> > >> I've addressed the issues you found as below: > > > > Please see my observations below. > > > >> On 22/10/2023 22:38, Bálint Réczey wrote: > >>> Hi Colin, > >>> > >>> I've checked the second upload at [1]. > >>> As you can see in the Lintian warnings there is a .git directory which > >>> is not ideal for a source package. > >>> I suggest using the most widely used git-buildpackage based workflow > >>> where the gbp command takes care of exporting the source package > >>> without the .git dir from the packaging repository. > >>> I'd be happy to set up a packaging repo for you at > >>> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libtypec <https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libtypec> and add you as a maintainer > >>> as described in [2] > > > > I still hold up my offer about setting up a git repo for packaging on > > Salsa. That comes with the benefit of automated fixes from Debian > > Janitor and I could also comment on changes right where they happened. > > Thank you for your kind offer; I definitely think this is a good idea, > please can you set this up for me. Much appreciated! I've created the repo at https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libtypec <https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libtypec> and added you as a maintainer. I've also set up CI, thus when you push your branches the pipelines will start. You may already be familiar with https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/ <https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep14/> , but if not, please check it before pushing your packaging repository. ... > > I think my comment here was misleading, sorry for that. > > Shipping *.pc is desired, shipping it in the .../libtypec.pc/ dir as a > > result of specifying .../libtypec.pc as the target dir in the .install > > file was not desired. It was even patched to have the right content. > > Please ship the .pc file in the -dev package. > > Fixed. The .pc file is now at the right location, but contains multiarch strings which will differ across architectures. I suggest hardcoding the paths in the patch. ... > > * As you switched back to use upstream's 0.4.0 SO version the .symbols > > file became wrong not matching the shipped SO version. Please fix > > that and also switch to the libtypec0 package name since it needs to > > match upstream's major SO version > > Fixed. The .symbols file's first line should be: libtypec.so.0 libtypec0 #MINVER# See deb-symbols(5) for more details. > . > > > > * I'd recommend asking upstream to switch to semantic SO versioning > > instead of using the project's version and switching to major version > > 1 when the API stabilized. > > Good idea. Will do when API changes and stabilizes. Great! Cheers, Balint > Colin > > > > > Cheers, > > Balint > > > >> Kind regards, > >> > >> Colin > >> > >> > >>>
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
Hi Balint, I've uploaded 0.4.0-2 with the suggested fixes. reply inlined below: On 09/11/2023 16:23, Bálint Réczey wrote: Hi Colin, Colin King (gmail) ezt írta (időpont: 2023. nov. 7., K, 15:18): Hi Balint, Thanks for responding with the review. I was waiting for the upstream project to release a 0.4 with some minor fixes before re-uploading to mentors. I've addressed the issues you found as below: Please see my observations below. On 22/10/2023 22:38, Bálint Réczey wrote: Hi Colin, I've checked the second upload at [1]. As you can see in the Lintian warnings there is a .git directory which is not ideal for a source package. I suggest using the most widely used git-buildpackage based workflow where the gbp command takes care of exporting the source package without the .git dir from the packaging repository. I'd be happy to set up a packaging repo for you at https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libtypec and add you as a maintainer as described in [2] I still hold up my offer about setting up a git repo for packaging on Salsa. That comes with the benefit of automated fixes from Debian Janitor and I could also comment on changes right where they happened. Thank you for your kind offer; I definitely think this is a good idea, please can you set this up for me. Much appreciated! Other observations regarding the packaging: * There is debian/install and also there are binary package specific *.install files which is slightly confusing. I suggest dropping debian/install. Fixed * In the debian/*.install files you need to specify only the target dir, not the target file. Fixed In libtypec-dev /usr/share/pkgconfig/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/libtypec.pc/libtypec.pc gets shipped, which is not desired. Fixed I think my comment here was misleading, sorry for that. Shipping *.pc is desired, shipping it in the .../libtypec.pc/ dir as a result of specifying .../libtypec.pc as the target dir in the .install file was not desired. It was even patched to have the right content. Please ship the .pc file in the -dev package. Fixed * libtypec.h seems to be the same on all architectures. Does it have to be shipped in a multiarch include location? Fixed. Now in /usr/include and in the multiarch include location * Binary packages in debian/control are not marked as Multi-Arch: same * Please target experimental. The package needs to pass NEW and to migrate to testing it will need a new source-only upload anyway. Fixed. Please review the 0.4 release upload and let me know if this can be sponsored further to the changes I made. * Both libtypec-dev.install and libtypec1.install lists usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH} and as a result both packages ship the *.so symlink and *.so.0.4.0. Please ship *.so.0.4.0 in the library package and the *.so symlink in the -dev package only. Fixed. * As you switched back to use upstream's 0.4.0 SO version the .symbols file became wrong not matching the shipped SO version. Please fix that and also switch to the libtypec0 package name since it needs to match upstream's major SO version Fixed. . * I'd recommend asking upstream to switch to semantic SO versioning instead of using the project's version and switching to major version 1 when the API stabilized. Good idea. Will do when API changes and stabilizes. Colin Cheers, Balint Kind regards, Colin Cheers, Balint [1] https://mentors.debian.net/package/libtypec/ [2] https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 17:00:58 +0100 "Colin King (gmail)" wrote: Hi, I've uploaded a fixed package that addresses these issues. Colin On 18/07/2023 08:50, Adam Borowski wrote: On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 03:29:13PM +0100, Colin King (gmail) wrote: * Package name : libtypec Version : 0.3-1 * URL : https://github.com/Rajaram-Regupathy/libtypec libtypec1 - generic interface for efficient USB-C port management libtypec-dev - Development files for an interface for USB-C port management libtypec (0.3-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial release (Closes: #1023477) * Add patch 0001-fix-libtypec-so-version.patch to fix .so name version Hi! Before doing manual review, let's start with lintian: E: libtypec1: pkg-config-multi-arch-wrong-dir full text contains architecture specific dir x86_64-linux-gnu [usr/share/pkgconfig/libtypec.pc] W: libtypec-dev: empty-binary-package W: libtypec1: lacks-unversioned-link-to-shared-library example: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0] W: libtypec1: link-to-shared-library-in-wrong-package usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0 [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so] Meow!
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
Hi Balint, Thanks for responding with the review. I was waiting for the upstream project to release a 0.4 with some minor fixes before re-uploading to mentors. I've addressed the issues you found as below: On 22/10/2023 22:38, Bálint Réczey wrote: Hi Colin, I've checked the second upload at [1]. As you can see in the Lintian warnings there is a .git directory which is not ideal for a source package. I suggest using the most widely used git-buildpackage based workflow where the gbp command takes care of exporting the source package without the .git dir from the packaging repository. I'd be happy to set up a packaging repo for you at https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libtypec and add you as a maintainer as described in [2] Other observations regarding the packaging: * There is debian/install and also there are binary package specific *.install files which is slightly confusing. I suggest dropping debian/install. Fixed * In the debian/*.install files you need to specify only the target dir, not the target file. Fixed In libtypec-dev /usr/share/pkgconfig/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/libtypec.pc/libtypec.pc gets shipped, which is not desired. Fixed * libtypec.h seems to be the same on all architectures. Does it have to be shipped in a multiarch include location? Fixed. Now in /usr/include and in the multiarch include location * Binary packages in debian/control are not marked as Multi-Arch: same * Please target experimental. The package needs to pass NEW and to migrate to testing it will need a new source-only upload anyway. Fixed. Please review the 0.4 release upload and let me know if this can be sponsored further to the changes I made. Kind regards, Colin Cheers, Balint [1] https://mentors.debian.net/package/libtypec/ [2] https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 17:00:58 +0100 "Colin King (gmail)" wrote: Hi, I've uploaded a fixed package that addresses these issues. Colin On 18/07/2023 08:50, Adam Borowski wrote: On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 03:29:13PM +0100, Colin King (gmail) wrote: * Package name : libtypec Version : 0.3-1 * URL : https://github.com/Rajaram-Regupathy/libtypec libtypec1 - generic interface for efficient USB-C port management libtypec-dev - Development files for an interface for USB-C port management libtypec (0.3-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial release (Closes: #1023477) * Add patch 0001-fix-libtypec-so-version.patch to fix .so name version Hi! Before doing manual review, let's start with lintian: E: libtypec1: pkg-config-multi-arch-wrong-dir full text contains architecture specific dir x86_64-linux-gnu [usr/share/pkgconfig/libtypec.pc] W: libtypec-dev: empty-binary-package W: libtypec1: lacks-unversioned-link-to-shared-library example: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0] W: libtypec1: link-to-shared-library-in-wrong-package usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0 [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so] Meow!
Bug#955954: thermald: Depends on deprecated dbus-glib
This issue has been reported to the upstream project: https://github.com/intel/thermal_daemon/issues/416 ..looking like it will be resolved in the next release of thermald
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
Hi, I've uploaded a fixed package that addresses these issues. Colin On 18/07/2023 08:50, Adam Borowski wrote: On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 03:29:13PM +0100, Colin King (gmail) wrote: * Package name : libtypec Version : 0.3-1 * URL : https://github.com/Rajaram-Regupathy/libtypec libtypec1 - generic interface for efficient USB-C port management libtypec-dev - Development files for an interface for USB-C port management libtypec (0.3-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial release (Closes: #1023477) * Add patch 0001-fix-libtypec-so-version.patch to fix .so name version Hi! Before doing manual review, let's start with lintian: E: libtypec1: pkg-config-multi-arch-wrong-dir full text contains architecture specific dir x86_64-linux-gnu [usr/share/pkgconfig/libtypec.pc] W: libtypec-dev: empty-binary-package W: libtypec1: lacks-unversioned-link-to-shared-library example: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0] W: libtypec1: link-to-shared-library-in-wrong-package usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0 [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so] Meow!
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
On 18/07/2023 08:50, Adam Borowski wrote: On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 03:29:13PM +0100, Colin King (gmail) wrote: * Package name : libtypec Version : 0.3-1 * URL : https://github.com/Rajaram-Regupathy/libtypec libtypec1 - generic interface for efficient USB-C port management libtypec-dev - Development files for an interface for USB-C port management libtypec (0.3-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial release (Closes: #1023477) * Add patch 0001-fix-libtypec-so-version.patch to fix .so name version Hi! Before doing manual review, let's start with lintian: Thanks, which lintian options did you use so I can santicy check my fixes? Colin E: libtypec1: pkg-config-multi-arch-wrong-dir full text contains architecture specific dir x86_64-linux-gnu [usr/share/pkgconfig/libtypec.pc] W: libtypec-dev: empty-binary-package W: libtypec1: lacks-unversioned-link-to-shared-library example: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0] W: libtypec1: link-to-shared-library-in-wrong-package usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so.0.3.0 [usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtypec.so] Meow!
Bug#1041327: RFS: libtypec/0.3-1 [RFP] -- Development files for an interface for USB-C port management
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libtypec": * Package name : libtypec Version : 0.3-1 Upstream contact : Rajaram Regupathy * URL : https://github.com/Rajaram-Regupathy/libtypec * License : MIT * Vcs : [fill in URL of packaging vcs] Section : utils The source builds the following binary packages: libtypec1 - generic interface for efficient USB-C port management libtypec-dev - Development files for an interface for USB-C port management To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/libtypec/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libt/libtypec/libtypec_0.3-1.dsc Changes for the initial release: libtypec (0.3-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial release (Closes: #1023477) * Add patch 0001-fix-libtypec-so-version.patch to fix .so name version Regards, Colin Ian King
Bug#1023477: ITP: libtypec: progress request
Hi, The ITP for this library was placed back in 5th Nov 2022; I was wondering if there is any progress on this? If not, is it possible for me to take ownership and package this as I'm keen to ensure this is in Debian sooner than later. Regards, Colin
Bug#1038726: ITP: qatlib -- Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology hardware accelleration for security authentication and compression
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Colin Ian King X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org, colin.i.k...@gmail.com * Package name: qatlib Version : 23.02.0 Upstream Contact: giovanni.cabi...@intel.com * URL : https://github.com/intel/qatlib * License : BSD-3-Clause Programming Lang: C, x86 assemvler Description : Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology hardware accelleration for security authentication and compression Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (Intel(R) QAT) provides hardware acceleration for offloading security, authentication and compression services from the CPU, thus significantly increasing the performance and efficiency of standard platform solutions. Its services include symmetric encryption and authentication, asymmetric encryption, digital signatures, RSA, DH and ECC, and lossless data compression. It provides user space libraries that allow access to Intel(R) QuickAssist devices and expose the Intel(R) QuickAssist APIs and sample codes. See also: https://wiki.debian.org/QAT I intend to maintain this much like other Intel related Debian packages Sincerely, Colin Ian King
Bug#1036356: stress-ng: autopkgtest failures on 32 bit architectures
Thanks for the update, I'm planning to make a stress-ng release that contains this fix before the end of next week to address this and several other issues. Colin On 19/05/2023 16:21, Benjamin Drung wrote: Package: stress-ng Version: 0.15.07-1 Severity: serious Tags: patch Justification: autopkgtest failures User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com Usertags: origin-ubuntu mantic ubuntu-patch X-Debbugs-Cc: bdr...@debian.org Dear Maintainer, The autopkg tests on 32 bit architectures fail. In Ubuntu, the attached patch was applied to fix the autopkgtest: * Cherry-pick upstream commit "stress-pthread: use 64 bit tid_addr to fix stack clobbering on 32 bit platforms" and "stress-pthread: fix big endian tid addr for 32 bit systems" to fix test failures on 32 bit architectures (LP: #2019079) Thanks for considering the patch.
Bug#1024089: ITP: accel-config -- Utility for configuring the DSA subsystem for Linux
Hi Nick, I hadn't realized you were going to help the Intel folks on this, so apologies for usurping you. I've been maintaining quite a few Intel packages in Debian and I picked this up since I'm a new Intel employee and thought it would be useful to help on the final iterations of the packaging. I'm 99% the way to getting this sponsored so I think I'm almost complete on this work item now. Colin On 14/11/2022 19:56, nick black wrote: Colin Ian King left as an exercise for the reader: Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Colin Ian King X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org Hey Colin! I'm hoping to work with the Intel folks on this, and it seems you started the endeavor and guided it thus far. Can I assist you in any way at the moment?
Bug#1001666: stress-ng: flaky autopkgtest
Hi Sebastian, thanks for reporting this. Is is OK to ask a few questions as I've never seen this before on a wide range of kit that I test this on. 1. Is this failure repeatable? (I'm not sure how it occurs since there is a SIGSEGV handler for these cases). 2. Does it fail on specific machines? 3. What CPU model is the machine it fails on? I've tried to understand this failure, but so far I'm quite perplexed by it, so maybe it's a CPU specific caching behavior that I have misunderstood. Any assistance with the questions above would be most useful, Regards, Colin On 13/12/2021 21:48, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: Source: stress-ng Version: 0.13.08-1 Severity: important X-Debbugs-Cc: sramac...@debian.org The autopkgtests of stress-ng fail from time to time: | stress-ng: 20:49:12.58 info: [1091] unsuccessful run completed in 0.51s | stress-ng: 20:49:12.58 fail: [1091] cache instance 3 corrupted bogo-ops counter, 2 vs 0 | stress-ng: 20:49:12.58 fail: [1091] cache instance 3 hash error in bogo-ops counter and run flag, 796547380 vs 0 | stress-ng: 20:49:12.58 fail: [1091] metrics-check: stressor metrics corrupted, data is compromised | cache FAILED ... | zlib PASSED | 42 PASSED | 1 FAILED, cache | 0 SKIPPED See https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/s/stress-ng/17550292/log.gz for a recent failure Cheers
Bug#793303: marking this as "won't fix" and closing the bug
Hi there, since this is not fixable, I'm marking this as won't fix.
Bug#781506: thermald: some documentation for the user
Hi Ritesh, does man 5 thermal-conf.xml provide enough information? Colin