Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] iperf: version bump

[Robert Schwebel]

On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 05:33:42PM +0100, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 08:51:10PM +0100, Clemens Gruber wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 04:12:51PM +0100, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> > > Well, the configure options could use some cleanup in general, but that's
> > > nothing new.
> > 
> > You mean adding the (current) default options explicitly, right?
> > 
> > To sum up the update checklist:
> > 1) Check the diff of the configure --help outputs between the versions
> > 2) Check if options were missing/suboptimal before
> > 3) Check if they are in alphabetical order
> 
> Not alphabetical. Same order as 'configure --help'.
> I Open the makefile and diff next to each other in my editor. That makes it
> easy to see if
> a) the old options are ok
> b) what new options need to be added and where
> 
> > 4) Check if there are new binaries/libraries
> 
> For larger packages I usually compare 'find /packages/'.
> Usually with some tweeks to sort and filter out docs and headers etc.
> 
> > 5) Move/remove the patches
> 
> Very important. Especially patches for other architectures are often
> forgotten.
> 
> > 6) Testing
> > 
> > Tooling would be nice. But probably not worth the effort. Maybe for the
> > download, extract and ./configure --help diff.. what do you think?
> 
> What I usually do is:
> - build & install the old version
> - change the version number
> - 'ptxdist extract '
> - update the options
> - 'ptxdist install '
> - update the targetinstall stage
> - 'ptxdist targetinstall '
> - test
> 
> > > And for all packages: I prefer it if the subject contains ' ->
> > > '. It makes review easier. That way it's easier to see which
> > > updates a small patch-level updates and require less review (and can be
> > > applied shortly before a release) and which require a deeper look.
> > 
> > I'll keep the subjects for the v2 but will use the -> notation next
> > time. (?)
> 
> Yes. No need to change the current patches.

Any volunteer who writes a patch with these infos that improves the
documentation?

rsc
-- 
Pengutronix e.K.   | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0|
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686   | Fax:   +49-5121-206917- |

___
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] iperf: version bump

[Michael Olbrich]

Hi,

On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 08:51:10PM +0100, Clemens Gruber wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 04:12:51PM +0100, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> > Well, the configure options could use some cleanup in general, but that's
> > nothing new.
> 
> You mean adding the (current) default options explicitly, right?
> 
> To sum up the update checklist:
> 1) Check the diff of the configure --help outputs between the versions
> 2) Check if options were missing/suboptimal before
> 3) Check if they are in alphabetical order

Not alphabetical. Same order as 'configure --help'.
I Open the makefile and diff next to each other in my editor. That makes it
easy to see if
a) the old options are ok
b) what new options need to be added and where

> 4) Check if there are new binaries/libraries

For larger packages I usually compare 'find /packages/'.
Usually with some tweeks to sort and filter out docs and headers etc.

> 5) Move/remove the patches

Very important. Especially patches for other architectures are often
forgotten.

> 6) Testing
> 
> Tooling would be nice. But probably not worth the effort. Maybe for the
> download, extract and ./configure --help diff.. what do you think?

What I usually do is:
- build & install the old version
- change the version number
- 'ptxdist extract '
- update the options
- 'ptxdist install '
- update the targetinstall stage
- 'ptxdist targetinstall '
- test

> > And for all packages: I prefer it if the subject contains ' ->
> > '. It makes review easier. That way it's easier to see which
> > updates a small patch-level updates and require less review (and can be
> > applied shortly before a release) and which require a deeper look.
> 
> I'll keep the subjects for the v2 but will use the -> notation next
> time. (?)

Yes. No need to change the current patches.

Michael

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.   | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0|
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686   | Fax:   +49-5121-206917- |

___
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] iperf: version bump

[Clemens Gruber]

Hi,

On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 04:12:51PM +0100, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> Well, the configure options could use some cleanup in general, but that's
> nothing new.

You mean adding the (current) default options explicitly, right?

To sum up the update checklist:
1) Check the diff of the configure --help outputs between the versions
2) Check if options were missing/suboptimal before
3) Check if they are in alphabetical order
4) Check if there are new binaries/libraries
5) Move/remove the patches
6) Testing

Tooling would be nice. But probably not worth the effort. Maybe for the
download, extract and ./configure --help diff.. what do you think?

> And for all packages: I prefer it if the subject contains ' ->
> '. It makes review easier. That way it's easier to see which
> updates a small patch-level updates and require less review (and can be
> applied shortly before a release) and which require a deeper look.

I'll keep the subjects for the v2 but will use the -> notation next
time. (?)

Clemens

___
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] iperf: version bump

[Michael Olbrich]

Hi,

Well, the configure options could use some cleanup in general, but that's
nothing new.

And for all packages: I prefer it if the subject contains ' ->
'. It makes review easier. That way it's easier to see which
updates a small patch-level updates and require less review (and can be
applied shortly before a release) and which require a deeper look.

Michael

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 02:52:13PM +0100, Clemens Gruber wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Clemens Gruber 
> ---
>  patches/iperf-2.0.5/fix_early_termination.diff | 47 
> --
>  patches/iperf-2.0.5/series |  1 -
>  rules/iperf.make   |  6 ++--
>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>  delete mode 100644 patches/iperf-2.0.5/fix_early_termination.diff
>  delete mode 100644 patches/iperf-2.0.5/series
> 
> diff --git a/patches/iperf-2.0.5/fix_early_termination.diff 
> b/patches/iperf-2.0.5/fix_early_termination.diff
> deleted file mode 100644
> index f24dec7..000
> --- a/patches/iperf-2.0.5/fix_early_termination.diff
> +++ /dev/null
> @@ -1,47 +0,0 @@
> -iperf version 2.0.4 running in server mode exits when a client connects
> -using the -d (duplex) flag.
> -
> -To reproduce: On machine foo, run server:
> -
> -[somlo@foo]$ iperf -s
> -
> -on machine bar, run client in duplex mode:
> -
> -[somlo@bar]$ iperf -c foo -d
> -
> -
> -What happens: At the end of the test, the iperf process on machine foo exits.
> -
> -What *should* happen: At the end of the test, the iperf process on machine
> -should keep running, listening for new connections.
> -
> -===
> -
> -Patch form L. Gabriel Somlo on the iperf maillist 2009-01-21
> -More precisely: 
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail=1983829_id=128336=711371
> -
> -Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang 
> -
> 
> - src/Client.cpp |8 
> - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> -
> -Index: src/Client.cpp
> -===
>  src/Client.cpp.orig
> -+++ src/Client.cpp
> -@@ -207,10 +207,10 @@ void Client::Run( void ) {
> - char* readAt = mBuf;
> - 
> - #if HAVE_THREAD
> --if ( !isUDP( mSettings ) ) {
> --RunTCP();
> --return;
> --}
> -+// if ( !isUDP( mSettings ) ) {
> -+//  RunTCP();
> -+//  return;
> -+// }
> - #endif
> - 
> - // Indicates if the stream is readable 
> diff --git a/patches/iperf-2.0.5/series b/patches/iperf-2.0.5/series
> deleted file mode 100644
> index c490ac0..000
> --- a/patches/iperf-2.0.5/series
> +++ /dev/null
> @@ -1 +0,0 @@
> -fix_early_termination.diff -p0
> diff --git a/rules/iperf.make b/rules/iperf.make
> index 8f73dfc..469458e 100644
> --- a/rules/iperf.make
> +++ b/rules/iperf.make
> @@ -16,11 +16,11 @@ PACKAGES-$(PTXCONF_IPERF) += iperf
>  #
>  # Paths and names
>  #
> -IPERF_VERSION:= 2.0.5
> -IPERF_MD5:= 44b5536b67719f4250faed632a3cd016
> +IPERF_VERSION:= 2.0.9
> +IPERF_MD5:= 351b018b71176b8cb25f20eef6a9e37c
>  IPERF:= iperf-$(IPERF_VERSION)
>  IPERF_SUFFIX := tar.gz
> -IPERF_URL:= $(call ptx/mirror, SF, iperf/$(IPERF).$(IPERF_SUFFIX))
> +IPERF_URL:= $(call ptx/mirror, SF, iperf2/$(IPERF).$(IPERF_SUFFIX))
>  IPERF_SOURCE := $(SRCDIR)/$(IPERF).$(IPERF_SUFFIX)
>  IPERF_DIR:= $(BUILDDIR)/$(IPERF)
>  IPERF_LICENSE:= BSD
> -- 
> 2.10.2
> 
> 
> ___
> ptxdist mailing list
> ptxdist@pengutronix.de

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.   | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0|
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686   | Fax:   +49-5121-206917- |

___
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de