Re: [ANNOUNCE] libtraceevent.git

[Zamir SUN]

On 10/13/20 9:02 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:06:16 +0800
> Zamir SUN <sztsian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 3:17 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > [ Removing the powertop mailing list because it's rejecting everything ]
> > >
> > > On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:41:20 -0700
> > > Tony Jones <tonyj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 11:19:50AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > >   
> > > > > Once it's shown that it works for all the package maintainers, I will tag
> > > > > it which should create the tarballs automatically on the above link.
> > > >
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > It builds fine for me after manually creating the tarball from git.
> > > > Once there is an official versioned tarball I'll push it into
> > > > openSUSE.
> > > >
> > > > I presume some perf Makefile changes will be forthcoming to use it,
> > > > rather than continuing to force build it out of TRACE_EVENT_DIR
> > > >   
> > >
> > > Zamir found this issue with the Documentation man pages:
> > >
> > > Note, I'm not sure the proper way to fix this. I think this is the last
> > > issue I need to resolve before making the tag.
> > >   
> >
> > If anyone interested in, the discussion of this document compiling is
> > in the thread "libtraceevent: make doc-install tries different file
> > names than generated".
> >
> > With the patch Steve mentioned, I can package this in RPM already. And
> > it's pending review in Fedora now.
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887470
> >
> > So, for me, there is no more issue for Fedora packaging.
>
> So should I just add that one patch and tag it?

That would be great, at least for Fedora packaging.

Thanks!

--
Zamir SUN
Fedora user
GPG : 1D86 6D4A 49CE 4BBD 72CF FCF5 D856 6E11 F2A0 525E