APPLIED: [EOAN][UNSTABLE][PATCH v2 0/1] add bpftool to linux-tools-common

[Quentin Monnet]

2019-09-06 06:37 UTC-0500 ~ Seth Forshee <seth.forshee at canonical.com>
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 10:04:30PM +0100, Quentin Monnet wrote:
>> 2019-09-05 15:25 UTC-0500 ~ Seth Forshee <seth.forshee at canonical.com>
>>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 06:43:52PM +0100, Quentin Monnet wrote:
>>>> BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1774815
>>>>
>>>> [Impact]
>>>>
>>>> bpftool is a debugging and introspection tool for BPF elements, developed by
>>>> the BPF kernel community. It is essential to list and dump BPF programs and
>>>> maps loaded on the system. Its sources are located in the kernel repository,
>>>> and because it is not packaged, administrators willing to use bpftool must
>>>> download the whole kernel sources, compile and install the utility.
>>>>
>>>> [Fix]
>>>>
>>>> Adding bpftool to linux-tools and linux-tools-common packages makes it easily
>>>> accessible. These packages are already used to provide other tools located in
>>>> the kernel repository, such as perf.
>>>>
>>>> [Testcase]
>>>>
>>>> A test linux package was successfully built, at:
>>>>
>>>> https://launchpad.net/~qmonnet/+archive/ubuntu/ppa-linux-bpftool
>>>>
>>>> (Built with:
>>>>   do_zfs=false
>>>>   do_dkms_nvidia=false
>>>>   do_dkms_vbox=false
>>>>   skipabi=true
>>>>   skipmodule=true
>>>>   skipretpoline=true)
>>>>
>>>> Packages linux-tools-$(uname -r) and linux-tools-common can be built with
>>>> "debian/rules binary", and contain bpftool's binary and related files
>>>> (redirection script, bpftool manual pages, bash completion), respectively.
>>>>
>>>> [Regression Potential]
>>>>
>>>> Low, as far as I can tell: bpftool packaging does not change the way
>>>> other tools are packaged (apart from creating $(toolsman)/man8 a few
>>>> lines earlier), and should have no impact on the packaging of other
>>>> tools. One dependency is added to Build-Depends-Indep, none is removed.
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> This set was originally submitted for bionic [0], but rebased for the
>>>> development branch on Kleber's advice [1]. The version for bionic
>>>> included a backported patch from linux 4.16 for fixing bpftool build
>>>> following a change in bfd.h from binutils-dev (commit fb982666e380
>>>> ("tools/bpftool: fix bpftool build with bintutils >= 2.9")), but this
>>>> commit is already present in kernel 5.2.
>>>>
>>>> [0] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2019-July/102462.html
>>>> [1] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2019-August/103095.html
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>> - Switch from python-docutils to python3-docutils for the dependency
>>>>   providing rst2man for manual pages.
>>>> - Set CROSS_COMPILE when building bpftool.
>>>
>>> Applied to eoan/master-next and unstable/master, thanks!
>>>
>>
>> Thank you so much!
>>
>> If we want to have bpftool packaged on bionic too, should I resubmit the
>> set for bionic (as in [0]) as a SRU request? Or is there a different
>> process that I missed?
>>
>> [0] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2019-July/102462.html
> 
> If these patches apply cleanly to bionic you could have included it on
> the submission, however I think now resubmitting for bionic is your best
> option.
> 
> Thanks,
> Seth
> 

Understood, thank you.
Quentin