[Nut-upsdev] [Nut-upsuser] LibUSB-1.0+0.1 testing wanted, NUT 2.7.5 pending
jimklimov at gmail.com
Mon Dec 27 10:52:56 GMT 2021
Great news, and thanks for stepping up to help with the packages!
I think the NUT CI farm should try i2c on debian and derivatives, so gotta
check what it dislikes about EL7. This branch did bump the default
--enable-warnings=medium level since it was "solved" on all of the many
tested systems, so that change could also play a role and would be nice to
fix before a release (but hopefully not related to libusb changes).
For versioning - yes, it is a quirk in our autotools scripts that it
appends further version text (.1-count_since_tag-commit_hash) after the
base ("2.7.4" from configure.ac) when building from git source and not
On Sun, Dec 26, 2021, 23:06 Manuel Wolfshant <wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro>
> I've packaged
> https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/tree/fightwarn-libusb-1.0+0.1 for
> EL7 and uploaded the resulting rpms to
> 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 188.8.131.52 not 2.7.5 so probably I should rename
> the packages as well:
> [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ which upsc
> [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ rpm -qf /usr/bin/upsc
> [wolfy at wolfy epel-7-x86_64]$ upsc -V
> Network UPS Tools upscmd 184.108.40.206
> I'll try to build another set of packages against libusbx aka EL7's
> 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>
> 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
> 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
> Nut-upsuser mailing list
> Nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Nut-upsdev