On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 16:45:34 +0200 Simon Horman wrote:
> Hi Noah,
>
> I believe that the above commit resolves the licence problem that was
> raised earlier. Is it possible to find a way to move forwards on packaging
> bpftool?
Greetings,
I would really like to see bpftool packaged. Is there anyt
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:16:10AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 07:49:50PM -0800, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 09:50:17AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > > Please see
> > > > > https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/merge_requests/72
> > > >
>
Did you have any large estimation about when we could expect to have
bpftool packaged in Debian(experimental).
Reading this thread, I feel this is so closed.
Is there any easy way to test current package ? and give some feedback ?
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 07:49:50PM -0800, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 09:50:17AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > Please see https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/merge_requests/72
> > >
> > > Ugh. We cannot currently package bpftool in Debian. There are several
> > >
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 09:50:17AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > Please see https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/merge_requests/72
> >
> > Ugh. We cannot currently package bpftool in Debian. There are several
> > GPLv2-only files in its source tree, and it links unconditionally
> > agai
On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 21:28:39 -0800 Noah Meyerhans
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:34:26PM -0800, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> > Please see https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/merge_requests/72
>
> Ugh. We cannot currently package bpftool in Debian. There are several
> GPLv2-only files in it
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:34:26PM -0800, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> Please see https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/merge_requests/72
Ugh. We cannot currently package bpftool in Debian. There are several
GPLv2-only files in its source tree, and it links unconditionally
against the GPLv3 libbfd
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:34:26PM -0800, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 02:07:40PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
I would like to request packaging of bpftool which has been
included in upstream Linux tree since v4.15-rc1. I expect this can
be done in a similar manner to the way that
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 02:07:40PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> I would like to request packaging of bpftool which has been
> included in upstream Linux tree since v4.15-rc1. I expect this can
> be done in a similar manner to the way that perf, also present in
> the upstream Linux kernel tree, is p
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 02:07:40PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> I would like to request packaging of bpftool which has been
> included in upstream Linux tree since v4.15-rc1. I expect this can
> be done in a similar manner to the way that perf, also present in
> the upstream Linux kernel tree, is p
Source: linux
Version: 4.16.5-1
Followup-For: Bug #896165
control: severity -1 important
Dear Maintainers,
I would like to add the packaging of a direct dependency to the list: libbpf.
This library is most useful for using currently ongoing extensions of the linux
kernel towards a new high-speed
Source: linux
Version: 4.9.65-3+deb9u2
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
I would like to request packaging of bpftool which has been
included in upstream Linux tree since v4.15-rc1. I expect this can
be done in a similar manner to the way that perf, also present in
the upstream Linux kernel tre
12 matches
Mail list logo
