Hi kernel team,
cpupowerutils (the evolution of cpufrequtils) has been included as part
of the tools/ directory in the upstream linux kernel source.

do you have any plans of packaging cpupowerutils as part of linux-tools
or can I go ahead and package it separately?
Or even, is it worth spawning a new package off of the linux kernel
source (as is done today for linux-utils) and get cpupowerutils built
each time a new kernel is released?

I guess the main downside of packaging it as part of linux-utils (or the
linux kernel builds) is the fact that package revisions for
cpupowerutils would spawn a new kernel build.
Instead keeping cpupowerutils as a separate package extracted from
upstream linux sources would allow the package to live its own life.
So far the extra job that cpufrequtils carried was to load governors and
cpu drivers for cpufreq in an init script, this should be brought over
to cpupowerutils and is what historically caused most of the revisions
to be created aside from new upstream versions.

Thoughts?
--
mattia
:wq!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110830220137.GA15469@kamineko.org">http://lists.debian.org/20110830220137.GA15469@kamineko.org

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 07:01 +0900, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> Hi kernel team,
> cpupowerutils (the evolution of cpufrequtils) has been included as part
> of the tools/ directory in the upstream linux kernel source.
>
> do you have any plans of packaging cpupowerutils as part of linux-tools
> or can I go ahead and package it separately?
>
> Or even, is it worth spawning a new package off of the linux kernel
> source (as is done today for linux-utils) and get cpupowerutils built
> each time a new kernel is released?

Bastian Blank has plans to move building of userland tools such as perf
into the linux-kbuild-2.6 source package (renamed to linux-tools). You
can find this work in progress under
<svn://svn.debian.org/svn/kernel/dists/trunk/linux-tools>.

I think cpupowerutils should be built as part of linux-tools. However,
I assume that it will not be as closely tied to new kernel versions as
perf, so it does need to be part of a version-specific package. Is that
right?

> I guess the main downside of packaging it as part of linux-utils (or the
> linux kernel builds) is the fact that package revisions for
> cpupowerutils would spawn a new kernel build.
[...]

We do that quite often anyway... but no, it won't if it's part of
linux-tools.

Ben.