Bug#1063679: O: unionfs-fuse -- Fuse implementation of unionfs
Package: wnpp Severity: normal Dear Debian maintainers, unfortunately I don't have time anymore to maintain unionfs-fuse. There hadn't been any updates from me for the last years and I'm afraid it does not get any better. To my excuse I actually tried to upload a new version some time ago (1 or 2 years ago now), posted it to to debian mentors - no progress and I then didn't have time again either - the updated package was auto-removed from mentors.debian.net/packages/. Thanks, Bernd
Bug#535233: updated package
Hi all, I updated the packages on my home page and also made it mostly lintian clean now. I'm going to upload it to Debian-Mentors now. Cheers, Bernd -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#535233: ITP: collectl -- Initial package request
Hello Christopher, On Wednesday 01 July 2009, Simmons, Christopher wrote: > Package: collectl > Version: 3.3.4 > Severity: wishlist > X-Debbugs-CC: debian-de...@lists.debian.org > > *** Please type your report below this line *** > I wish to work on creating a debian package for collectl-3.3.4 > I already have a package, just didn't have the time yet to upload it. http://www.pci.uni-heidelberg.de/tc/usr/bernd/downloads/collectl/ This also includes some patches from Goswin. Cheers, Bernd -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#516096: ITP: libibumad -- OpenFabrics Alliance InfiniBand umad (user MAD) library
Guus Sliepen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:31:43AM +, Guy Coates wrote: > >> * Package name: libibumad >> Version : 1.2.3 >> Upstream Author : Voltaire, Inc. >> * URL : http://www.openfabrics.org > > I do not see a libibumad tarball there, I did find OFED-1.4.tgz which > contained a SRPM for it... if this is the only way upstream distributes > these libraries, please suggest to them that it is better if they publish > normal tarballs. Hmm, that is the difficult part. There are individual packages and there is OFED. OFED is a collection of many packages, mostly not the recent version, but a more tested stable version. E.g. IB management packages can be found here: http://www.openfabrics.org/downloads/management/ I already wondered all the time, which would be better for Debian, the packages from OFED or the individual packages. IHMO, extracting all the srpms is a pain... > >> Description : OpenFabrics Alliance InfiniBand umad (user MAD) >> library >> >> libibumad provides the user MAD library functions which sit on top of >> the user MAD modules in the kernel. These are used by the IB diagnostic >> and management tools, including OpenSM. > > I have absolutely no clue what this does, except that it has something to > do > with InfiniBand. What is MAD? What is OpenSM? What functionality does > this library provide? Also drop "OpenFabrics Alliance" from the short > description. If you want to mention it, do it in the long description. > The problem is, there is nowhere a real description of what all these IB libraries are actually doing. MAD = management datagram. As far as I understand it, you need this library to send IB management packages from user space. OpenSM = open subnet manager. Each IB network needs at least one running subnet manager, which controls the routing between ports. From the man page of opensm: opensm provides an implementation of an InfiniBand Subnet Manager and Administration. Such a software entity is required to run for in order to initialize the InfiniBand hardware (at least one per each InfiniBand subnet). Guy, it is a bit a pity, since you did all the work again, we already had done at q-leap :( IMHO all these IB packages are too many for one maintainer, what do you think to make an alioth for these? Cheers, Bernd -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#481490: ITP: unionfs-fuse -- user-space directory concatenation
On Friday 16 May 2008, Daniel Baumann wrote: > how does it compare to funionfs? Compare the sources yourself ;) Funionfs has all code in a very few files, only a very few comments and then some of these in French... On the other hand, unionfs-fuse is well structured, has many comments, uses lots of static functions, etc (well I wrote large chunks of the cow code, so I naturally think the code looks good ;) ). However, I tested funfionfs myself some time ago and it wasn't running sufficiently stable (this was shortly before I started to work on unionfs-fuse). Again on the other hand, unionfs-fuse is sufficiently stable to run on diskless workstations (used by my former university group for /etc and /var) and diskless HPC compute nodes (we are presently using it on most of our clusters for all system directories). Both of these setups do require large uptimes and an rock stable unionfs implementation. Btw, I'm not going to package the released version and also for now not Radeks main branch, since both branches have some severe bugs. Radek is presently also too busy to merge my branch (http://podgorny.cz/~bernd/hg/hgwebdir.cgi/radek-trunk-bernd-merge). Cheers, Bernd PS: I know, funionfs has one advantage to unionfs-fuse, it has a control utility. However, for our needs a stable unionfs implementation is by far more important than this tool. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
