...it was almost midnight, Cinderella became a pumpkin, and NUT was released!.. Trick or treat?! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/nut-upsdev/attachments/20231031/f3590340/attachment.htm>
On Tue, 2023-10-31 at 23:51:44 +0100, Jim Klimov via Nut-upsuser wrote:> ...it was almost midnight, Cinderella became a pumpkin, and NUT was > released!.. > > Trick or treat?!You're treating us with NUTs - is this only a trick? :-) (It isn't, I'm currently downloading release 2.8.1 - perhaps to Debian package it...) Thanks for the update and your spontaneity! Best - Steffen -- Steffen Grunewald, Cluster Administrator Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute) Am M?hlenberg 1 * D-14476 Potsdam-Golm * Germany ~~~ Fon: +49-331-567 7274 Mail: steffen.grunewald(at)aei.mpg.de ~~~
On Wednesday, November 1st, 2023 at 8:25 AM, Steffen Grunewald <steffen.grunewald at aei.mpg.de> wrote:> You're treating us with NUTs - is this only a trick? :-) > (It isn't, I'm currently downloading release 2.8.1 - perhaps to Debian > package it...)Hello Steffen, If you do package it for Debian, I would certainly be interested in doing some testing on Raspbian (Bullseye) arm64. I'm not adept at Debian packaging however. --Larry
NOTE for packagers (and other builders of NUT release tarball): Got an ERRATA to NUT v2.8.1: * https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/2155/commits/2842201db26468a1eb1bf579e8b2fbf7538c5076 Probably should have a short cycle before a NUT v2.8.2 with smaller scope than originally anticipated :\ In the meanwhile, packages of NUT v2.8.1 are encouraged to apply a small patch per referenced commit. Jim On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 11:51?PM Jim Klimov <jimklimov at gmail.com> wrote:> ...it was almost midnight, Cinderella became a pumpkin, and NUT was > released!.. > > Trick or treat?! >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/nut-upsuser/attachments/20231109/0096b07b/attachment.htm>
I am (belatedly) updating pkgsrc to 2.8.1 (+ bugfix). (FWIW, I think a 2.8.1.1 or 2.8.2 immediately with the fix is in order.>From a packaging viewpoint, the effort to update for a release is about3 minutes plus time to adapt anythhing that has changed. So I'd much rather have releases more often.) In the pkgsrc build, nut finds tcp wrappers because they are part of the base system. That's generally ok. checking whether to enable libwrap (tcp-wrappers) support... yes There is a program sockdebug.c in server: Making all in server `libparseconf.la' is up to date. CC sockdebug.o `libcommon.la' is up to date. CC upsd.o CC user.o CC conf.o CC netssl.o CC sstate.o CC desc.o CC netget.o CC netmisc.o CC netlist.o CC netuser.o CC netset.o CC netinstcmd.o CCLD sockdebug ld: /usr/lib/libwrap.so: undefined reference to `deny_severity' ld: /usr/lib/libwrap.so: undefined reference to `allow_severity' *** [sockdebug] Error code 1 as I understand it, the tcprappers interface requires those variables to exist. Nut does define them: work/nut-2.8.1/server/upsd.c:int allow_severity = LOG_INFO; work/nut-2.8.1/server/upsd.c:int deny_severity = LOG_WARNING; but not in sockdebug. In server/Makefile.am, tcpwrappers are added for all targets: if WITH_WRAP LDADD += $(LIBWRAP_LIBS) endif I don't know if the right fix is define these in sockdebug.c change LDADD to be only for upsd or something else. I think I'm going to just patch out building sockdebug for now. Or is that supposed to be installed for user use? (If so, it really should have nut in the name.)
(I have been doing things Other Then Nut for quite a while and had not updated or tried to build.) I have updated pkgsrc to 2.8.1 plus the patch sent earlier today. I installed the package and tested it with a Best Fortress, just monitoring, but it seems to work fine. (I had previously been running a snapshot between 2.8.0 and 2.8.1.) So it looks good - thanks all for hacking portably!