[Pkg-xen-devel] Plans for buster

[Ian Jackson]

Hans van Kranenburg writes ("Re: Plans for buster"):
> This can be done from tag debian/4.11.1_pre+1.733450b39b-1_exp1 (which
> is right now the same as the master branch).

Thanks for doing all this work.  I have just sent it to experimental.

I did some reviewing and diffing.  I have some comments, or, at least,
things I noticed.  None of them were IMO blockers for experimental.
Hence the upload.  (But I think some of them are blockers for sid.)

* libxtoolcore has the wrong soname.  Upstream it is 1.  IDK if this
  should have its own deb.  Putting it in the libxenstore one is
  probably tolerable.  Hans, I know you know there's a problem here.
  I haven't investigated what happens with that patch reverted, yet.

* I don't understand why all the Linux module API stuff is needed.
  Xen does not have modules.  So VERSION_UPSTREAM, VERSION_BINNMU,
  etc., are maybe not needed ?

* The patch to reintroduce xs_restrict should go upstream.  I think
  that, upstream, it would be a backport candidate, thus meaning
  Debian wouldn't have to carry it.  (And I'm a tools maintainer and a
  stable maintainer upstream, so my initial opinion is fairly
  predictive...)

* I don't think renaming the patches was particularly helpful.  It
  generates noise in diffs.  (But please don't rename them back.)

* I noticed this in debian/rules:
     SHELL := sh -e
  Does that actually work ?  Colour me surprised.  I wonder why it
  isn't done more widely.

* There were a bunch of complaints from lintian.

* I followed the instructions in debian/README.source.md and
  my first attempt to build a source package failed [1].  Using
     dpkg-buildpackage -uc -ui -us -B
  instead worked.  This should be documented in README.source.md.
  If we don't change the whole git workflow; I'm afraid I'm going
  to reopen that, but that'll be a separate message.

Thanks,
Ian

[1]
zealot:xen> dpkg-source -b .
dpkg-source: info: using source format '3.0 (quilt)'
dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file: debian/lib/python/debian_linux/__pycache__/gencontrol.cpython-35.pyc
dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file: debian/lib/python/debian_linux/__pycache__/utils.cpython-35.pyc
dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file: debian/lib/python/debian_linux/__pycache__/__init__.cpython-35.pyc
dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file: debian/lib/python/debian_linux/__pycache__/debian.cpython-35.pyc
dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file: debian/lib/python/debian_linux/__pycache__/config.cpython-35.pyc
dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file: debian/lib/python/debian_xen/__pycache__/__init__.cpython-35.pyc
dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file: debian/lib/python/debian_xen/__pycache__/debian.cpython-35.pyc
dpkg-source: error: detected 7 unwanted binary files (add them in debian/source/include-binaries to allow their inclusion).
zealot:xen> 


-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.