linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] libtraceevent.git

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201014094453.73f37dd4@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 14 Oct 2020 09:44:53 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Cc:     Zamir SUN <sztsian@...il.com>, Tony Jones <tonyj@...e.de>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Trace Devel <linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        "Ziqian SUN (Zamir)" <zsun@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Chikunov <vt@...linux.org>,
        Tzvetomir Stoyanov <tstoyanov@...are.com>,
        Yordan Karadzhov <ykaradzhov@...are.com>,
        Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
        John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
        Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
        Al Stone <ahs3@...ian.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] libtraceevent.git

On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:08:48 +0100
Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com> wrote:

> Just a thought, if you see
> https://repology.org/project/linux-tools/versions then you will notice
> that libtracevent has been packaged by the distros with a version of
> v5.x+, and I will have the same problem for Debian also. Do you think
> it makes sense to start  with a version of v6.x when you tag it? If
> that is not possible then we will have to use epoch like we did for
> libbpf.

Grumble. This is another reason I wish this was not part of the kernel. It
should not have a versioning based on the kernel. Yeah, this may be an
issue, especially, since library versions have real meaning with respect
to compatibility, where the Linux kernel version numbers do not.

We may need to use the epoch on this, because 5.7 has no meaning compared
to 5.8 and 5.9. I didn't even realize this was being shipped yet.

Yeah, I want to make this 1.1.0 as I've been tracking changes internally
with this.

-- Steve