Manuel Wolfshant
2021-Dec-26 22:06 UTC
[Nut-upsuser] [Nut-upsdev] LibUSB-1.0+0.1 testing wanted, NUT 2.7.5 pending
Hello I've packaged https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/fightwarn-libusb-1.0+0.1 for EL7 and uploaded the resulting rpms to https://wolfy.fedorapeople.org/nut-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn/ These packages are built against stock libusb i.e. compatible with libusb-0.1. Minimal testing shows them as functional but as always, YMMV. I had to disable support for i2c, it triggered some build errors and I am in no mood to debug them. As a sidenote, upsc reports 2.7.4.1 not 2.7.5 so probably I should rename the packages as well: [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ which upsc /usr/bin/upsc [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ rpm -qf /usr/bin/upsc nut-client-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn_libusb.wolfy.x86_64 [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ upsc -V Network UPS Tools upscmd 2.7.4.1 I'll try to build another set of packages against libusbx aka EL7's libusb-1.0 Manuel On 12/26/21 12:07, Strahil Nikolov via Nut-upsuser wrote:> Hey Jim, > > > do we have precompiled binaries or rpm ? > > Best Regards, > Strahil Nikolov > > On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 11:51, Jim Klimov via Nut-upsdev > <nut-upsdev at alioth-lists.debian.net> wrote: > >> ? This work has originally delayed merging of libusb-1.0 support >> (from issue https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/issues/300 and >> several candidate branches to pick from), in particular because with >> the original codebase sporting thousands of build warnings, it was >> hard to notice any new "offences" introduced by this large set of >> changes. I was afraid that merging it would even have to wait until >> after the next NUT release, but in the end found that some remaining >> warnings in the original USB-related NUT codebase made those >> branches' changes the better solution. >> >> ? Now, before we find the hard way if the cure is worse than the >> disease, I would like to ask people with USB-connected UPSes (and >> also those using the MGE SHUT protocol) to build and test >> https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/fightwarn-libusb-1.0+0.1 >> branch with their setups - hopefully hitting as many OSes and CPU >> types as feasible, as well as trying both libusb-0.1, libusb-1.0 (and >> not sure about libusb-0.1-compat). > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/nut-upsuser/attachments/20211227/b4af5721/attachment.htm>
Manuel Wolfshant
2021-Dec-26 22:20 UTC
[Nut-upsuser] [Nut-upsdev] LibUSB-1.0+0.1 testing wanted, NUT 2.7.5 pending
On 12/27/21 00:06, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:> Hello > > I've packaged > https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/fightwarn-libusb-1.0+0.1 > for EL7 and uploaded the resulting rpms to > https://wolfy.fedorapeople.org/nut-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn/ > These packages are built against stock libusb i.e. compatible with > libusb-0.1. Minimal testing shows them as functional but as always, YMMV. > I had to disable support for i2c, it triggered some build errors and I > am in no mood to debug them. > > As a sidenote, upsc reports 2.7.4.1 not 2.7.5 so probably I should > rename the packages as well: > [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ which upsc > /usr/bin/upsc > [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ rpm -qf /usr/bin/upsc > nut-client-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn_libusb.wolfy.x86_64 > [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ upsc -V > Network UPS Tools upscmd 2.7.4.1 > > > I'll try to build another set of packages against libusbx aka EL7's > libusb-1.0 >The packages built against libusb-1.0 are available at https://wolfy.fedorapeople.org/nut-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn_libusbx/ For now I've left in place ( at https://wolfy.fedorapeople.org/nut ) the old versions of nut I built 4-5 years ago but, if memory serves, those were built for EL6 which has an year since it is no longer supported. Therefore I recommend against using them and I will probably remove them after New Year's day. wolfy> Manuel > > On 12/26/21 12:07, Strahil Nikolov via Nut-upsuser wrote: >> Hey Jim, >> >> >> do we have precompiled binaries or rpm ? >> >> Best Regards, >> Strahil Nikolov >> >> On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 11:51, Jim Klimov via Nut-upsdev >> <nut-upsdev at alioth-lists.debian.net> wrote: >> >>> ? This work has originally delayed merging of libusb-1.0 support >>> (from issue https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/issues/300 and >>> several candidate branches to pick from), in particular because with >>> the original codebase sporting thousands of build warnings, it was >>> hard to notice any new "offences" introduced by this large set of >>> changes. I was afraid that merging it would even have to wait until >>> after the next NUT release, but in the end found that some remaining >>> warnings in the original USB-related NUT codebase made those >>> branches' changes the better solution. >>> >>> ? Now, before we find the hard way if the cure is worse than the >>> disease, I would like to ask people with USB-connected UPSes (and >>> also those using the MGE SHUT protocol) to build and test >>> https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/fightwarn-libusb-1.0+0.1 >>> branch with their setups - hopefully hitting as many OSes and CPU >>> types as feasible, as well as trying both libusb-0.1, libusb-1.0 >>> (and not sure about libusb-0.1-compat). >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Nut-upsuser mailing list > Nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/nut-upsuser/attachments/20211227/97585271/attachment-0001.htm>
Jim Klimov
2021-Dec-28 16:52 UTC
[Nut-upsuser] [Nut-upsdev] LibUSB-1.0+0.1 testing wanted, NUT 2.7.5 pending
I've made a centos7 container on the farm today and updated the docs to reflect the nuances. The libusb* branches seem to be building ok there (with some warnings for system headers). Do I get it right that there is no libi2c-devel (smbus.h and userland i2c-dev.h) in the distro? Jim On Sun, Dec 26, 2021, 23:20 Manuel Wolfshant <wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro> wrote:> On 12/27/21 00:06, Manuel Wolfshant wrote: > > Hello > > I've packaged > https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/fightwarn-libusb-1.0+0.1 for > EL7 and uploaded the resulting rpms to > https://wolfy.fedorapeople.org/nut-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn/ > These packages are built against stock libusb i.e. compatible with > libusb-0.1. Minimal testing shows them as functional but as always, YMMV. > I had to disable support for i2c, it triggered some build errors and I am > in no mood to debug them. > > As a sidenote, upsc reports 2.7.4.1 not 2.7.5 so probably I should rename > the packages as well: > [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ which upsc > /usr/bin/upsc > [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ rpm -qf /usr/bin/upsc > nut-client-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn_libusb.wolfy.x86_64 > [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ upsc -V > Network UPS Tools upscmd 2.7.4.1 > > > I'll try to build another set of packages against libusbx aka EL7's > libusb-1.0 > > The packages built against libusb-1.0 are available at > https://wolfy.fedorapeople.org/nut-2.7.5-0.nut_fightwarn_libusbx/ > > For now I've left in place ( at https://wolfy.fedorapeople.org/nut ) the > old versions of nut I built 4-5 years ago but, if memory serves, those were > built for EL6 which has an year since it is no longer supported. Therefore > I recommend against using them and I will probably remove them after New > Year's day. > > > wolfy > > > > Manuel > > On 12/26/21 12:07, Strahil Nikolov via Nut-upsuser wrote: > > Hey Jim, > > > do we have precompiled binaries or rpm ? > > Best Regards, > Strahil Nikolov > > On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 11:51, Jim Klimov via Nut-upsdev > <nut-upsdev at alioth-lists.debian.net> <nut-upsdev at alioth-lists.debian.net> > wrote: > > This work has originally delayed merging of libusb-1.0 support (from > issue https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/issues/300 and several > candidate branches to pick from), in particular because with the original > codebase sporting thousands of build warnings, it was hard to notice any > new "offences" introduced by this large set of changes. I was afraid that > merging it would even have to wait until after the next NUT release, but in > the end found that some remaining warnings in the original USB-related NUT > codebase made those branches' changes the better solution. > > Now, before we find the hard way if the cure is worse than the disease, > I would like to ask people with USB-connected UPSes (and also those using > the MGE SHUT protocol) to build and test > https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/fightwarn-libusb-1.0+0.1 > branch with their setups - hopefully hitting as many OSes and CPU types as > feasible, as well as trying both libusb-0.1, libusb-1.0 (and not sure about > libusb-0.1-compat). > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Nut-upsuser mailing listNut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.nethttps://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser > > > _______________________________________________ > Nut-upsuser mailing list > Nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/nut-upsuser/attachments/20211228/738b907a/attachment.htm>