Hey thanks for the kind words y'all.

Honestly credit mostly goes to the folks who checked in unreleased changes
and submitted patches over the last few years; but I'm glad to have given
it the last push.

I absolutely encourage package maintainers out there to reach out with any
patches that they have needed to apply to the source tarballs over the
last few years. I've been handling a few Nixpkgs ones myself in side
branches ( still testing and working out kinks ) since that's my daily
driver.

As for CI style testing that's been my main focus over the last few months,
but those are external to tye repository obviously. I will summarize some
of that progress in another email. Essentially I've got Hydra kicking again
and I'm expanding a matrix of versions for autoconf, automake, gcc, make,
m4, binutils-gdb, and various other alternatives to test against.

I am manually testing Darwin, Debian, and CentOS periodically, but Hydra
can easily start driving the Linux ones in VMs. Once I have a workflow for
Linux VMs on Hydra I think I'll add instructions for distro maintainers to
plug their ISO in to test with the matrix of dependencies. Under the hood
Nix is just using Qemu, so really the Nix parts could be stripped away
eventually to make it more accessible.

An important one I want to get automated is testing FreeBSD Coreutils as an
input to account for my own blind spots, since I'm so used to the GNU flags
and quirks.

Really I want to get the test suite/CI automated to the point that
contributors and myself can experiment more freely without having to "just
know" the millions of platform, distro, and tool specific oddities that
they might inadvertently break with a patch. Obviously there's always going
to be a need to manually test some systems, but having more immediate
feedback where we can could make the tool much easier to extend.



On Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 9:24 PM Sam James <s...@gentoo.org> wrote:

>
>
> > On 31 Mar 2022, at 21:42, Richard Purdie <
> richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It was great to see a libtool release, thanks for that!
> >
> > I upgraded Yocto Project to it in time for our LTS release:
> >
> >
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/poky/commit/?id=ff7b41573842a403c81f58bee41fc8163a9d7754
> >
> > so far things seem reasonable, we've had a few minor issues but they're
> not
> > really libtool's fault or concern. One interesting quirk was that the
> shell
> > script optimisation changes made between 2.4.6 and 2.4.7 resulted in
> very long
> > (6,000+ character) pathnames being passed to the C library functions.
> This upset
> > our fakeroot emulation but we've fixed that to workaround the issue.
> >
>
> Nice and smooth so far as well here.
>
> > Yocto Project is carrying a few patches. I did clean them up and shared
> many of
> > them in October:
> >
> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2021-10/msg00012.html
> >
> > Some are more important than others and there what I believe are good
> bug fixes
> > in there. My questions:
> >
> > a) Is there a possibility these could be considered for merging?
> >
> > [snip]
> >
>
> Thanks for asking this and am wondering the same thing. Hoping for your
> patches
> to get in (as Yocto's needs often align with ours) and then I plan on
> revisiting
> our (Gentoo's) stack.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Richard
>
> Best,
> sam
>

Reply via email to