Bug#1018945: transition: libbpf
On 2022-11-06 11:36:16 +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 8:14 PM Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> > Control: tags -1 confirmed
> >
> > On 2022-11-05 00:11:07 +0000, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
> > > --
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 10:22:32PM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > > As of today only v4l-utils and bpfcc still fails to build with libbpf
> > > > in experimental.
> > > >
> > > > v4l-utils is a key package, I will look into its fix and request the
> > > > libbpf transition after that.
> > >
> > > All the packages except bpfcc (#1018818) now builds fine with libbpf/1.0.1-1
> > > from experimental. I can help bpfcc maintainers with the porting to new libbpf
> > > but they have not replied to the bug report or to my mails.
> > >
> > > Please consider libbpf for transition.
> >
> > Please go ahead
>
> Thanks. Has been uploaded.
The autopkgtests of dpdk regressed on amd64:
https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/d/dpdk/28081847/log.gz
Could you please take a look?
Best
Sebastian
--
Sebastian Ramacher
Reply to: