Hello, Gabriel Wicki <gabr...@erlikon.ch> writes:
> A little more hacking leads me to the conclusion that (probably with > version 4 but it's not exactly clear from the changelog) procps has made > some significant changes to it's API. So, unless igt-gpu-tools (and > probably others) are fixed upstream they remain broken. Fixes through > simple regex-magic in our build-phases might be possible, but I am not > confident enough in the matter to guarantee that the package would not > just build but be broken in a more specific manner. > > Is there an easy way to check which dependents of procps are actually > broken currently? Or is it really just igt-gpu-tools? > > There's two ways to go (I'd be happy for some input and volunteer to do > the actual leg-work): > 1. Add an additional procps-3 package with the older API to fix the > broken packages. > 2. Leave it as-is and wait for an upstream change of the currently > broken packages. I have found the upstream issue: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools/-/issues/116 We can wait it out until the release, which will be out Soon (tm), or we make use of the patch that debian applies to igt-gpu-tools so it can work with the new libproc2 API: https://salsa.debian.org/xorg-team/app/intel-gpu-tools/-/blob/067ddd789fd80c12972fb92db8f93fadbdc4530e/debian/patches/libproc2_library AFAICS, this would not lead to a world-rebuild. Thoughts? - Jelle
