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

[Manuel Wolfshant]

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-upsdev/attachments/20211227/97585271/attachment.htm>