Salvatore Bonaccorso <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Mika, > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 09:42:53AM +0100, Michael Prokop wrote: >> * Michael Prokop [Wed Dec 30, 2020 at 11:11:32PM +0100]: >> >> > With the ongoing efforts around BTF and CO-RE (see >> > http://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2020-11-04/bpf-co-re-btf-libbpf.html), >> > it would be nice to have a decent and working toolchain for it with >> > our upcoming bullseye release. >> >> [...] >> >> > So IMO it would be great, if it's possible to ship libbpf-tools on >> > Debian/bullseye systems without giving it much thoughts due to >> > dependencies and disk space requirements. >> >> The train for bullseye has left AFAICT, but there are ongoing efforts >> regarding the packaging for other distributions at >> https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/pull/3263 and it might make sense to >> jump onto it. > > Yupp, that is the case, from this point on one cannt introduce new > binary packages even built from an existing source, cf. > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2021/02/msg00002.html .
I waited till now because I thought it will make sense for the upstream to add some install target and possibly integrate with their CMake so I don't need to craft more things just to get it installed. > > That said would have been nice to have it in bullseye, but let's aim > for bookworm :). Definitely I would package it for experimental once the next release with required changes from the PR pointed is released. Also though the train for bullseye has left I will still backport this new libbpf-tools once bullseye is released just like currently I'm doing it for buster. (All latest releases are in buster backports) Cheers, Vasudev
