From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40F1DC433C1 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:51:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A0E061985 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:51:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231584AbhC3Kue (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:50:34 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com ([209.85.221.48]:39653 "EHLO mail-wr1-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229633AbhC3KuX (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:50:23 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id e18so15765682wrt.6 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:50:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=j5tv5i4YjO4q0yxyzOXnWrIqr1ZLbwL45Lg7wCUmhXo=; b=M+q600F109lAf/YzJWECEIpiUFygkE8J+nFCzE1JbHhhhHAiVN1seQhoPpPY3oPCPc o5CU/8qU9/enMG/Olt8SOctRZsoMUWJ+Zv5MmHhmiK57VO4LXU6+OYStl7c7WR6BvvGn j71glQVrMXe6V9HrNkHLi/Qr/+5hGRa+bY/SDqzgiv12cPVl9B7Ce68OF1yQAT7IBm0C r4OO2D/bUrABoeQ1M3S+gx0Oxfdm4E+X3BwTLd5m+kJyFVP2VPumWpSaATDEboxkQXhV Qtyd8l95bGGlFFprFEF/h71f5/z0wL70Gp4WidyKlnQRS3aojMD666Lgoc3JBa16w/gK d3nA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5309dCnQzveR+nDfONOTgoX7RQLBC9gCxILOqvUIer9Vbviz0I3R Wi2z3vpggkanyon9EEKGg/c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwTntIWOm2ekj4ZHNjPLzv+wztOCCeNM4DxzlDIkrUvfH1rUGG6gMDLMeQu9PGNNmegjOAvhg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:10d:: with SMTP id o13mr2310783wrx.106.1617101422645; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:50:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a01:4b00:f419:6f00:7a8e:ed70:5c52:ea3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c8sm38378131wrd.55.2021.03.30.03.50.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:50:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8cefd2c1cf59c1618365a738677afcb2ab6acd01.camel@debian.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH dwarves v3] libbpf: allow to use packaged version From: Luca Boccassi To: Dominique Martinet , dwarves@vger.kernel.org Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:50:13 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-HEQqB7Vtis8cm08pGl/Y" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5-1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: dwarves@vger.kernel.org --=-HEQqB7Vtis8cm08pGl/Y Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2021-03-30 at 13:47 +0900, Dominique Martinet wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I see this commit has been reverted just before the 1.20 release in Feb: > --- > Revert "libbpf: allow to use packaged version" >=20 > This reverts commit 82749180b23d3c9c060108bc290ae26507fc324e. >=20 > Getting in the way of releasing 1.20, breaking the build of a dwarves > rpm when a libbpf package is installed in a fedora 33 system: >=20 > In file included from /home/acme/rpmbuild/BUILD/dwarves-1.20/strings.c:7: > /home/acme/rpmbuild/BUILD/dwarves-1.20/pahole_strings.h:9:10: fatal error= : bpf/btf.h: No such file or directory > 9 | #include > | ^~~~~~~~~~~ >=20 > Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > --- >=20 > I can understand reverting due to other pressure to get a release out > but most distros (including fedora) frown upon vendoring code so I think > it would be good to have back ultimately. >=20 > Did you or someone else (Luca?) ever take the time to look at it? >=20 > I don't see what would be so different with fedora to make this > unfixable, I'd be happy taking a look if nobody has so far. > Would you take the patch back in if I somehow fix rpmbuild with a libbpf > package installed on fedora33? >=20 >=20 > Thanks, Hi, I did not realise it was reverted (if I was pinged and I missed it: sorry about that) - what was the issue precisely? This has been used on Ubuntu and Debian for a few months now, no problems reported. Happy to have a look too if needed. --=20 Kind regards, Luca Boccassi --=-HEQqB7Vtis8cm08pGl/Y Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEErCSqx93EIPGOymuRKGv37813JB4FAmBjAmUACgkQKGv37813 JB6JXhAAwOKFtwmSeQknjY1SK8Q6Do9Xesak0MBt2t6wcL8WwvUvfxkYHR8/bBdY KvFuph+4QAaCCct0D0pYG4bkPqYEx3CPjgADpJRrRarmBtP8rlQfel2akkQ9NJEJ VW3eKRb+7+dpJGbty56lKA5Jst6Aft7zhe9lWvXqUus6FVXoyF7+/Wgoi5GgXnWj FktSaeLGtRWRiFhGJwMt53mNibcazb6NGRZgLMgPNvxBDgUdoTFwpVuLvorQvO/N McWwKMm3HuftULcYTj0C6eYBRR9ZZL/zpl07XkslqS35YNvffqoHc11OA14KC5Ru RlfJmYXMMqrL7rV0iLNodYFXDDDzIzmeUZ2YxDe8BcIktI0Y3lwk+pFXQwawsXw3 ojhugzxspHz1FsLAkjf9IECsHdU+o9XLx8DI74fT05lM8NccVix0QBoMZgg8LYIZ eG+LoOJ/pez4HlXcBh1BAcR/feQC/FtECbgkwz12tWxjypnNLiqimT0IdhKTDubb b1cz1NDkmyvpGs7ltmhybeqjUmj5UE450+qzR4OtRcL1EMGk+0sBRJZl+sVxvUCt 5OxhTN3b9PgmDZenvwO0o9ibzoiWIe9BDG/DtRsbKyNE6Zd0AVMXij7RqLN2JKhq feLSH8R8yQSUOl3HHHFLSzG3uRPm6rNio+HCYXbVfsW9QiM2g3A= =FcXO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-HEQqB7Vtis8cm08pGl/Y--