On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Zach Welch zwelch@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 10/05/2010 01:56 PM, Michael Hope wrote:
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Loďc Minier loic.minier@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 05, 2010, Michael Hope wrote:
Could you please: * Mention the idea to upstream to see if anyone disagrees * See if anyone upstream has other ARM or x86 patches to include * Test under ARM Thumb-2, i686, and x86_64 * Spin a tarball to go out with the 2010.11 release.
NB: If we spin a tarball which is more than an upstream snapshot (e.g. we include patches from the mailing-list), we should rename it (for instance "ltrace-linaro")
Hmm. There's a conflict there. One requirement is to be 'traceable back to the upstream version'. If we pick up random patches then that is hard and calling it ltrace-linaro makes sense. However, we also want later upstream ltrace release to automatically obsolete ours.
If we release a 'ltrace-linaro', which turns into the Ubuntu package 'ltrace-linaro', can it be superseded by a later 'ltrace' release?
Personally, I think the simplest/best solution will be to encourage upstream to release a new version. At the very least, I would like to see all of the needed patches make it into an official upstream Git tree, which presently seems unlikely to happen soon without some help. Certainly, I believe that Linaro should avoid maintaining this type of secondary project indefinitely, and that is exactly what I see happening unless something changes with the upstream project.
Agreed. We have members specifically asking for ltrace so if upstream dont't react in a reasonable time frame then we'll have to. Note that Linaro secondary projects are not maintained but may be useful to others.
I sent an e-mail to the ltrace-devel list today to encourage one of the recent contributors to begin preparing a new tree for the purposes of release, as he has been waiting patiently for almost a year in the hope that the maintainer will reappear and handle that task. There are literally dozens of patches that basically have been ignored during the past year which I think deserve to be committed, so I also directly encouraged the ltrace community to consider adopting a new maintainer and begin moving forward again. At the very least, I have turned the situation into a fire for the current maintainer that can't be ignored.
I'm happy for you to spend up to a man-week helping upstream with this process.
Meanwhile, I have been trying to determine why I am getting lots of segfaults when running the test suite on an ARM test machine. On the upside, the x86 test suite works fine after a couple of the outstanding patches were applied to my tree, but they didn't solve the problems that I am seeing on ARM. I will continue to investigate these issues and brace myself for the possibility that I might need to spin a Linaro release.
Good, thanks.
-- Michael