[Bug 2051925] Re: [MIR] promote libtracefs as a trace-cmd dependency

[Adrien Nader]

Still working on it. I'm only cleaning up the changes but I've been
having issues with the autopkgtest infrastructure since the beginning of
the week (if I trigger tests within "too" quickly, the testbed setup
fails).

Status is:
- amd64 and arm64 pass,
- ppc64el fails with 2, 3, or 4 failures,
- s390x fails early with a segfault
- not sure about i386 and armhf which I considered as second-class here.

A number of tests are skipped because they are basically performance
tests and therefore easily fail in CI. I need to investigate if the
ppc64el failures fall into this.

The s390x issue might be related to endianness but imitating the
endianness patch in libtraceevent didn't yield success and I didn't have
much time to devote to that on top of the rest.

It doesn't seem reasonable to spend much more time in a row on this at
the moment. We can work on better ppc64el and s390x over time. Is that
OK for that MIR?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to libtracefs in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051925

Title:
  [MIR] promote libtracefs as a trace-cmd dependency

Status in libtracefs package in Ubuntu:
  Incomplete

Bug description:
  A previous MIR bug was open back in March 2023 (see LP: #2008799)

  [Availability]
  The package libtracefs is already in Ubuntu universe.
  The package libtracefs build for the architectures it is designed to work on.
  It currently builds and works for architectures: amd64, arm64, armhf, ppc64el, riscv64, s390x.
  Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtracefs

  [Rationale]
  - The package libtracefs is a runtime dependency of trace-cmd (MIR bug: LP: #2051850)
  - The package libtracefs is required in Ubuntu main no later than Feb 29 2024 (Feature Freeze) due to the will to have performance/tracing tools in Noble (LTS).

  [Security]
  - Nothing was found in the CVE database https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=libtracefs
  - Also nothing was found in the OSS security mailing list archive.
  - No CVE in the Ubuntu security tracker https://ubuntu.com/security/cves?package=libtracefs
  - Nor in the Debian security tracker https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/libtracefs
  - No executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin`
  - Package does not install services, timers or recurring jobs
  - Packages does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024)
  - Packages does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...)

  [Quality assurance - function/usage]
  - The package works well right after install

  [Quality assurance - maintenance]
  - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs
  - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtracefs/+bug
  - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libtracefs
  - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support

  [Quality assurance - testing]
  - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log:
  https://launchpadlibrarian.net/709710895/buildlog_ubuntu-noble-amd64.libtracefs_1.8.0-1_BUILDING.txt.gz
  - The package runs an autopkgtest, but it is a "superficial" one. It is currently passing on amd64, arm64, armhf, ppc64el, s390x:
    - https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/amd64/libt/libtracefs/20231004_082855_0e2e8@/log.gz
    - https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/arm64/libt/libtracefs/20231027_030103_e076f@/log.gz
    - https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/armhf/libt/libtracefs/20240117_070719_e9efd@/log.gz
    - https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/ppc64el/libt/libtracefs/20231004_044825_a4dfc@/log.gz
    - https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/s390x/libt/libtracefs/20240108_125300_f280f@/log.gz

  [Quality assurance - packaging]
  - debian/watch is present and works
  - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field
  - This package does not yield massive lintian Warnings, Errors
  - Lintian overrides are not present
  - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages.
  - The package will not be installed by default
  - Packaging and build is easy, link to d/rules https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtracefs/tree/debian/rules

  [UI standards]
  - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation)

  [Dependencies]
  - There is one dependency that is not yet in main, MIR for libtraceevent at:
  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtraceevent/+bug/2051916

  [Standards compliance]
  - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy

  [Maintenance/Owner]
  - Owning Team will be Foundations
  - Team is not yet, but will subscribe to the package before promotion
  - A static libtracefs.a library is being built and shipped in libtracefs-dev
  - This does not use vendored code
  - This package is not rust based
  - This package has been built recently https://launchpadlibrarian.net/709710895/buildlog_ubuntu-noble-amd64.libtracefs_1.8.0-1_BUILDING.txt.gz

  [Background information]
  The Package description explains the package well
  Upstream Name is libtracefs
  Link to upstream project: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/libs/libtrace/libtracefs.git

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtracefs/+bug/2051925/+subscriptions