GNU bug report logs - #55762
[PATCH core-updates] linux-pam: Update to 1.5.2

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 55762 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 55762 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> gmail.com>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] Upgrade linux-pam to 1.5.2
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 05:09:07 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: tags -1 + patch

Hi,

For my work in making PAM configurable in Guile, I rely on the foreign
function interface (FFI). The automatic generation of that interface
requires Pkgconfig files. Those files are not available in Guix.
Linux-PAM started shipping them in the release after the one we have.
The attached patch upgrades linux-pam to version 1.5.2.

The changes are further documented in the commit message.

I am new to Guix and already use the new version of linux-pam locally
(via Guix System) but I was unable to test the patch according to the
requirements and recommendations listed for this submission. [1]

This email was sent to -devel in lieu of -mentors, which does not
exist. Any guidance is much appreciated. Thanks for taking a look!

KInd regards
Felix Lechner

[1] https://guix.gnu.org/en/manual/devel/en/html_node/Submitting-Patches.html

[0001-Update-linux-pam-to-1.5.2.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
To: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 55762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#55762] [PATCH] Upgrade linux-pam to 1.5.2
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2022 20:16:27 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Felix,

Felix Lechner 写道：
> For my work in making PAM configurable in Guile, I rely on the 
> foreign
> function interface (FFI). The automatic generation of that 
> interface
> requires Pkgconfig files. Those files are not available in Guix.
> Linux-PAM started shipping them in the release after the one we 
> have.
> The attached patch upgrades linux-pam to version 1.5.2.

Thanks for working on both!

> The changes are further documented in the commit message.

And thanks for writing a clear commit message.  A few thoughts:

- The ‘gnu: foo: Update to x.y.z’ messages you see in the Guix 
 commit history are standardised.  The format's documented in the 
 GNU ‘(standards)Change Logs’ info page, but just take a stroll 
 through the history to get a feel for the majority of cases.

- Don't feel obligated to explain why you're upgrading a package, 
 although you're free to do so if you like (it was interesting 
 and I learnt something).

 Assuming no regressions, we always prefer to ship newer versions 
 of things.

- And finally, a personal windmill of mine:

> The extra argument to ./configure is needed to sidestep an issue
> upstream.[1]

 belongs in the code, where your fellow hackers can see it, not 
 buried in the commit log where $nobody will:

 ;; Work around 
 <https://github.com/linux-pam/linux-pam/issues/466>.

As you might now, this update rebuilds a good part of the world 
and will have to pass through the core-updates branch…

 $ guix refresh -l linux-pam | cut -d: -f1

> I am new to Guix and already use the new version of linux-pam 
> locally
> (via Guix System) but I was unable to test the patch according 
> to the
> requirements and recommendations listed for this submission. [1]

…so it's impressive if you rebuilt most of your entire system 
based on the new nyacc/linux-pam packages.

What still needs to be done, and which problems did you encounter?

Kind regards,

T G-R

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #14 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> gmail.com>
To: 55762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
Subject: Re: [bug#55762] [PATCH] Upgrade linux-pam to 1.5.2
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2022 09:25:28 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 11:42 AM Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr> wrote:
>
> - The ‘gnu: foo: Update to x.y.z’ messages you see in the Guix
>   commit history are standardised.

The commit message was adjusted to the community standards.

> - Don't feel obligated to explain why you're upgrading a package,

I removed the explanation.

> > The extra argument to ./configure is needed to sidestep an issue
> > upstream.[1]
>
>   belongs in the code, where your fellow hackers can see it, not
>   buried in the commit log where $nobody will:
>
>   ;; Work around
>   <https://github.com/linux-pam/linux-pam/issues/466>.

Good idea! The comment was dropped from the commit message. Instead, I
added your note to the code.

> As you might now, this update rebuilds a good part of the world
> and will have to pass through the core-updates branch…
>
> …so it's impressive if you rebuilt most of your entire system
> based on the new nyacc/linux-pam packages.

Actually, my installation did not rebuild much at all, perhaps because
my local desktop runs few servers that would use PAM for
authentication.

Looking through the long list of consuming packages, my sense is that
one of the build systems may pull it in, perhaps via fakeroot or sudo.
I am not sure why cl-css or cl-uglify-js would otherwise need PAM.

> What still needs to be done, and which problems did you encounter?

I encountered no problems locally, but cannot speculate how Guix's
numerous build systems might react to the presence of the three new
Pkgconfig files. It was a reason why I mentioned the files in my
original commit message. My thought was that someone triangulating a
build issue elsewhere could perhaps find the information helpful.

An updated patch, which was also rebased, was attached. Thank you!

Kind regards,
Felix Lechner

[0001-gnu-linux-pam-Update-to-1.5.2.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #22 received at 55762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> gmail.com>
To: 55762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
Subject: Re: [bug#55762] [PATCH core-updates] Upgrade linux-pam to 1.5.2
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 08:37:27 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

This rebased patch applies cleanly after commit f172118ca43. Thanks!

Kind regards
Felix Lechner

[0001-gnu-linux-pam-Update-to-1.5.2.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #25 received at 55762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> lease-up.com>
To: 55762 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
Subject: Re: [bug#55762] [PATCH core-updates] Upgrade linux-pam to 1.5.2
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2022 17:36:12 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

Upstream accepted my merge request [1] so I added a code comment with
the version reference. Here is the updated patch. Thanks!

Kind regards
Felix Lechner

[1] https://github.com/linux-pam/linux-pam/pull/493

[0001-gnu-linux-pam-Update-to-1.5.2.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #32 received at 55762-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> lease-up.com>
Cc: 55762-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
Subject: Re: bug#55762: [PATCH core-updates] linux-pam: Update to 1.5.2
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 22:48:02 +0200

Hi,

Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> lease-up.com> skribis:

> From 0854ffe7bd25ce883fbe63f4862929239e7a1907 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> lease-up.com>
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:34:21 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: linux-pam: Update to 1.5.2.
>
> * gnu/packages/linux.scm (linux-pam): Update to 1.5.2.
>   Add explicit libdir for pkgconfig files.

Applied, thanks!  :-)

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.