Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > * Package name : pthsem
>
> Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
> package? Else you'll have to share the Debian patches.
The situation with GNU pth is:
* pth in debian is orphaned (#543857)
* the last upstream relase is from 08-Jun-2006 (2.0.7)
* the last release was mainly updating copyright + updating autotool files
* I tried to contact upstream (Ralf S. Engelschall), while doing the
first versions of semaphore support for pth, but failed to get an answer.
* I don't remember an answer from Ralf S. Engelschall on the
pth-users list in the last year(s).
pthsem up to 2.0.7 is GNU pth with some patches applied (semaphore
support, valgrind support and various fixes).
As upstream seams to be dead, I decided to "fork" in the upcoming
release.
* pthsem is now able to cope with system time changes, if it can use a
monotonic clock.
* moved to automake based build system
* GIT repository does not contain any autotool generated files any more,
so they get updated at every checkout.
* compat package for building pth applications with pthsem
* includes lintian clean debian packaging (derived from the "offical"
debian packages)
pthsem is an essential dependency of linknx/eibd, so it tested by its
users on various plattforms (x86 and various embedded linux variants).
Regards,
Martin Kögler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
01-20-2010, 07:26 AM
Martin Koegler
Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:48:24AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> > > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > * Package name : pthsem
> > >
> > > Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
> > > package? Else you'll have to share the Debian patches.
> >
> > The situation with GNU pth is:
>
> I guessed so, but still.
>
> The problem is that people know pth, but they don't know pthsem (yet).
> It will be a long time before people discover that there is a new
> interesting pthsem package that basically does the same as pth with
> quite a few extra features, is not dead etc. Why not just replacing the
> existing pth package with pthsem to avoid that delay?
pth and pthsem can be installed in parallel, as they use different
filenames (pth.h+libpth.so* / pthsem.h/libpthsem.so*). Both packages
use the same symol names in their libraries.
The libpthsem-compat provides/conflicts libpth-dev. It contains stub
files for pth.m4, pth.h and pth-config, which "redirect" to the pthsem
files. Software built with libpthsem-compat installed will link
against libpthsem.
My intention was not to replace pth, but to provide a migration path.
> Were I Martin Kögler, I'd even just request GNU to become the new
> maintainer of pth.
I must admit, that I have not read anything about GNU maintainers, but
GNU has usually a bigger "philosophical overhead".
I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
need.
Regards,
Martin Kögler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Wed Jan 20 10:30:01 2010
Return-path: <users-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Envelope-to: tom@linux-archive.org
Delivery-date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:19:21 +0200
Received: from bastion.fedoraproject.org ([209.132.182.51]:60429)
by s2.java-tips.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <users-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org>)
id 1NXVmY-0000pd-Bs
for tom@linux-archive.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:19:18 +0200
Received: by bastion2.fedora.phx.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 503)
id 86EBF10FA82; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:48:33 +0000 (UTC)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on
bastion2.fedora.phx.redhat.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 testsºYES_50 autolearn=no
version=3.3.0
Received: from lists.fedoraproject.org (unknown [192.168.1.21])
by bastion2.fedora.phx.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 031FC10F952;
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:48:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from collab1.fedoraproject.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by lists.fedoraproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA901326797;
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:46:26 +0000 (UTC)
X-Original-To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Delivered-To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Received: from smtp-mm1.fedoraproject.org (smtp-mm1.fedoraproject.org
[80.239.156.217])
by lists.fedoraproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF28326793
for <users@lists.fedoraproject.org>;
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:46:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mars.math-info.univ-paris5.fr (mars.math-info.univ-paris5.fr
[193.48.200.18])
by smtp-mm1.fedoraproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 261FA87E4F
for <users@lists.fedoraproject.org>;
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:46:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from dipankar.homelinux.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mars.math-info.univ-paris5.fr (8.14.3/jtpda-5.4) with ESMTP id
o0K8kNDK023481
for <users@lists.fedoraproject.org>; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:46:23 +0100
Message-ID: <4B56C2DF.9070006@mi.parisdescartes.fr>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:46:23 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?RnJhbsOnb2lzIFBhdHRl? <francois.patte@mi.parisdescartes.fr>
Organization: =?UTF-8?B?VW5pdmVyc2l0w6kgUGFyaXMgRGVzY2FydGVz?User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090825)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Community support for Fedora users <users@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Subject: Re: Can't ssh to machine after re0installing as F12
References: <m3iqayb8cb.fsf@colina.demon.co.uk> <4B56BA09.5050804@mi.parisdescartes.fr>
<4B56BC88.2050702@greshko.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B56BC88.2050702@greshko.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
X-BeenThere: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Community support for Fedora users <users@lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Id: Community support for Fedora users <users.lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.fedoraproject.org?subject=unsubscrib e>
List-Archive: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users>
List-Post: <mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@lists.fedoraproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.fedoraproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Sender: users-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org
Errors-To: users-bounces@lists.fedoraproject.org
Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:06:21PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 21:04:30 +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
>
> > > I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
> > > need.
> >
> > All I care about is that there is an agreement between the Debian
> > community and the upstream developer. Martin is very active in
> > supporting his environment and in that respect I am to inclined to
> > support his decision.
> >
> > Can we conclude that pthsem is a valid branch, worth a seperate package?
> >
> > An alternative for Martin is probably to include/hide pthsem in bcusdk;
> > but that would not be as clean IMHO (ffmpeg anyone?)
> >
> If pthsem is pth + improvements, and pth is unmaintained both upstream
> and in Debian, what's the advantage of changing the library/package
> name? I'm not sure we care if its homepage is at GNU or elsewhere.
I have no problem with renaming pthsem into pth, if this is wanted by
the "community". I don't want to do a hostile takeover of pth.
But this needs coordination with the other distributions shipping pth.
If one of the big distributions says no and still ships GNU pth, it
will only cause confusion.
I will not call the result "GNU pth", only pth. Calling it GNU will
probably only add restrictions/requirements, without any benefit.
Regards,
Martin Kögler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
01-22-2010, 06:08 PM
"Ralf S. Engelschall"
Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
On 20.01.10 23:04, Martin Koegler wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:06:21PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 21:04:30 +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
need.
All I care about is that there is an agreement between the Debian
community and the upstream developer. Martin is very active in
supporting his environment and in that respect I am to inclined to
support his decision.
Can we conclude that pthsem is a valid branch, worth a seperate package?
An alternative for Martin is probably to include/hide pthsem in bcusdk;
but that would not be as clean IMHO (ffmpeg anyone?)
If pthsem is pth + improvements, and pth is unmaintained both upstream
and in Debian, what's the advantage of changing the library/package
name? I'm not sure we care if its homepage is at GNU or elsewhere.
I have no problem with renaming pthsem into pth, if this is wanted by
the "community". I don't want to do a hostile takeover of pth.
But this needs coordination with the other distributions shipping pth.
If one of the big distributions says no and still ships GNU pth, it
will only cause confusion.
I will not call the result "GNU pth", only pth. Calling it GNU will
probably only add restrictions/requirements, without any benefit.
This seems like a Debian related discussion. But as the author of
GNU Pth I can at least say that I've never heard of "pthsem"
myself (if I received any email, then, sorry, it seems it was
filtered by the anti-spam stuff) and also don't know why GNU Pth is
considered unmaintained.
Sure, I've not released any newer versions since 2006, but as long
as nobody drops me a note that something is broken there is no
requirement for any new releases. I'm using it at least under
the latest versions of FreeBSD, Linux and Solaris since years.
The functionality of GNU Pth is fully complete (at least to the
extend I originally planned at about 2004) since 2006 and
version 2.0.x.
Over the last 10 years we have seen half a dozen forks of
GNU Pth (for various addon functionalities or whatever), but they
were at least never named "GNU Pth" or just "Pth". If the current
name of this fork is "pthsem", please keep it this way. But please avoid
naming it (or its Debian package) just "pth". Thanks.
If "pthsem" is really fully backward compatible to GNU Pth,
then we can even check whether we can include its functionality into
GNU Pth, too. Where do I find its latest sources? Is is the one
under http://www.auto.tuwien.ac.at/~mkoegler/index.php/pth?
Ralf S. Engelschall
rse@engelschall.com
www.engelschall.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
01-23-2010, 11:54 AM
Martin Koegler
Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 08:08:03PM +0100, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> This seems like a Debian related discussion. But as the author of
> GNU Pth I can at least say that I've never heard of "pthsem"
> myself (if I received any email, then, sorry, it seems it was
> filtered by the anti-spam stuff) and also don't know why GNU Pth is
> considered unmaintained.
First, I happy, that contacting you has (finally) succeed and one of
mails reached you.
> Sure, I've not released any newer versions since 2006, but as long
> as nobody drops me a note that something is broken there is no
> requirement for any new releases. I'm using it at least under
> the latest versions of FreeBSD, Linux and Solaris since years.
> The functionality of GNU Pth is fully complete (at least to the
> extend I originally planned at about 2004) since 2006 and
> version 2.0.x.
Yes, pth is stable and working, but probably not feature complete for
some people (otherwise there would be no need for forks).
> Over the last 10 years we have seen half a dozen forks of
> GNU Pth (for various addon functionalities or whatever), but they
> were at least never named "GNU Pth" or just "Pth". If the current
> name of this fork is "pthsem", please keep it this way. But please avoid
> naming it (or its Debian package) just "pth". Thanks.
Calling it pth was the idea of some people on the debian mailing list
to avoid having GNU pth and a "extended" pth package in the distribution.
> If "pthsem" is really fully backward compatible to GNU Pth,
> then we can even check whether we can include its functionality into
> GNU Pth, too. Where do I find its latest sources? Is is the one
> under http://www.auto.tuwien.ac.at/~mkoegler/index.php/pth?
The latest sources can be found at:
http://bcusdk.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=bcusdk/bcusdk;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/pthsem/master
I'll send you in a private mail more details and hits to the relevant
changes.
Regards,
Martin Kögler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
