[Nut-upsdev] [Nut-upsuser] LibUSB-1.0+0.1 testing wanted, NUT 2.7.5 pending

[Jim Klimov]

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-upsdev/attachments/20211228/738b907a/attachment.htm>