Re: [ANNOUNCE] libtraceevent.git

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:06:16 +0800
Zamir SUN <sztsian@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 3:17 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > [ Removing the powertop mailing list because it's rejecting everything ]
> >
> > On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:41:20 -0700
> > Tony Jones <tonyj@suse.de> wrote:
> >  
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 11:19:50AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >  
> > > > Once it's shown that it works for all the package maintainers, I will tag
> > > > it which should create the tarballs automatically on the above link.  
> > >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > It builds fine for me after manually creating the tarball from git.
> > > Once there is an official versioned tarball I'll push it into
> > > openSUSE.
> > >
> > > I presume some perf Makefile changes will be forthcoming to use it,
> > > rather than continuing to force build it out of TRACE_EVENT_DIR
> > >  
> >
> > Zamir found this issue with the Documentation man pages:
> >
> > Note, I'm not sure the proper way to fix this. I think this is the last
> > issue I need to resolve before making the tag.
> >  
> 
> If anyone interested in, the discussion of this document compiling is
> in the thread "libtraceevent: make doc-install tries different file
> names than generated".
> 
> With the patch Steve mentioned, I can package this in RPM already. And
> it's pending review in Fedora now.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887470
> 
> So, for me, there is no more issue for Fedora packaging.
> 

So should I just add that one patch and tag it?

-- Steve