Hi all
Firstly, thank you Adolf for the encouragement and extra pointers to start this task.. I think I have currently successfully prepared a new version of the zabbix_agentd package containing latest zabbix_agentd LTS version (v5.0.9).
I tested the package on an ipfire-test-vm instance set up with the iso built by the make.sh script and then manually unpacking the package using the instructions of https://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/ipfire-2-x/addon-howto and all seems well except that the service is not automatically started during install.sh which calls: --- restore_backup ${NAME} start_service --background ${NAME} --- So I'm assuming ${NAME} is not available when I manually run install.sh as per instructions, and that it will be available when pakfire itself installs the package? Is there a way to test the actual package deployment using pakfire ?
Then I have a few other questions: - In the LFS template there is a PAK_VER variable, and it is not clear to me what this exactly is. Is this a revision number for current packaged version? or just a 'counter' for how many package versions there have been for this program in IPFire ?
- In the LFS template for current zabbix_agentd v4.2.6 DL_FROM is pointing to URL_IPFIRE.. Should this be changed ? Or should I upload the new source-file for v5.0.9 to URL_IPFIRE in some way ? (are there instructions somewhere?) or ..?
Then a more practical question: Next to 'just' an upgrade of the current Zabbix agent I also added a few config files etc for use with my Zabbix IPFire specific monitoring template. This changes Alexander's original config a little, but should remain backwards compatible. Should I submit this as 2 separate patches or will a single patch suffice?
Regards Robin
Hi Robin,
On 28/03/2021 20:29, Robin Roevens wrote:
Hi all
Firstly, thank you Adolf for the encouragement and extra pointers to start this task.. I think I have currently successfully prepared a new version of the zabbix_agentd package containing latest zabbix_agentd LTS version (v5.0.9).
I tested the package on an ipfire-test-vm instance set up with the iso built by the make.sh script and then manually unpacking the package using the instructions of https://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/ipfire-2-x/addon-howto and all seems well except that the service is not automatically started during install.sh which calls:
restore_backup ${NAME} start_service --background ${NAME}
So I'm assuming ${NAME} is not available when I manually run install.sh as per instructions, and that it will be available when pakfire itself installs the package?
That is correct in both cases.
Is there a way to test the actual package deployment using pakfire ?
When I am testing a package what I do is run the following commands first:-
NAME="zabbix_agentd"
export NAME
That then sets $NAME to your package name and should make all commands that use $NAME work successfully.
Hopefully that will also help you.
Then I have a few other questions:
- In the LFS template there is a PAK_VER variable, and it is not clear
to me what this exactly is. Is this a revision number for current packaged version? or just a 'counter' for how many package versions there have been for this program in IPFire ?
In IPFire 2.x it is used as a continuously incrementing counter so you should set it one higher than the previous version. It never resets. (That is different to what the aim is for IPFire 3 but that is still under development).
- In the LFS template for current zabbix_agentd v4.2.6 DL_FROM is
pointing to URL_IPFIRE.. Should this be changed ? Or should I upload the new source-file for v5.0.9 to URL_IPFIRE in some way ? (are there instructions somewhere?) or ..?
Leave that as it is and when you run ./make.sh downloadsrc if it completes successfully then it means that the new version you are using was successfully downloaded by the IPFire source system. IPFire keeps a copy on their system of all source tarballs in case the original versions have a problem.
Then a more practical question: Next to 'just' an upgrade of the current Zabbix agent I also added a few config files etc for use with my Zabbix IPFire specific monitoring template. This changes Alexander's original config a little, but should remain backwards compatible. Should I submit this as 2 separate patches or will a single patch suffice?
I think the core devs prefer changes separated but it depends, they would be best to comment on that.
I think it depends on how closely integrated the changes are. You can do them as a single patch, you can do them as a series of patches [PATCH 1/2] and [PATCH 2/2] or as completely separate patches. To me it sounds like probably a series would make sense.
For a series do a git commit -s on the changed files that make up your core change and then do a second git commit -s on the additional changed files. Then do a git format-patch -o ..... command and it will create two patch files 0001.... and 0002.... from the two commits. Hopefully that is clear enough.
I would also say that if you make your best effort with your submission you will get feedback on if you should have done it differently but it will be friendly constructive feedback. I have had that sort of feedback myself and it has always been an opportunity to learn and do better the following time.
I look forwards to seeing your update successfully getting into Core Update 156.
Regards,
Adolf Belka
Regards Robin
Hi Adolf
Thanks for the feedback.
Adolf Belka schreef op zo 28-03-2021 om 22:21 [+0200]:
So I'm assuming ${NAME} is not available when I manually run install.sh as per instructions, and that it will be available when pakfire itself installs the package?
That is correct in both cases.
Is there a way to test the actual package deployment using pakfire ?
When I am testing a package what I do is run the following commands first:-
NAME="zabbix_agentd"
export NAME
That then sets $NAME to your package name and should make all commands that use $NAME work successfully.
Hopefully that will also help you.
Ok, that should indeed do the trick then. I added it to the testing example in the wiki page, so that is clear for future package maintainers following those instructions.
Then I have a few other questions:
- In the LFS template there is a PAK_VER variable, and it is not
clear to me what this exactly is. Is this a revision number for current packaged version? or just a 'counter' for how many package versions there have been for this program in IPFire ?
In IPFire 2.x it is used as a continuously incrementing counter so you should set it one higher than the previous version. It never resets. (That is different to what the aim is for IPFire 3 but that is still under development).
Thanks for the clarification. The wiki page didn't mention PAK_VER, so I also added that to the page.
- In the LFS template for current zabbix_agentd v4.2.6 DL_FROM is
pointing to URL_IPFIRE.. Should this be changed ? Or should I upload the new source-file for v5.0.9 to URL_IPFIRE in some way ? (are there instructions somewhere?) or ..?
Leave that as it is and when you run ./make.sh downloadsrc if it completes successfully then it means that the new version you are using was successfully downloaded by the IPFire source system. IPFire keeps a copy on their system of all source tarballs in case the original versions have a problem.
Ok. But then how will the IPFire source system know from where to download the original source tarball to keep as a copy ? Do I have to request the file to be added to URL_IPFIRE supplying the source url on this mailing list, or in the patch comments? Or do I put the copy of the source there myself some way ?
Then a more practical question: Next to 'just' an upgrade of the current Zabbix agent I also added a few config files etc for use with my Zabbix IPFire specific monitoring template. This changes Alexander's original config a little, but should remain backwards compatible. Should I submit this as 2 separate patches or will a single patch suffice?
I think the core devs prefer changes separated but it depends, they would be best to comment on that.
I think it depends on how closely integrated the changes are. You can do them as a single patch, you can do them as a series of patches [PATCH 1/2] and [PATCH 2/2] or as completely separate patches. To me it sounds like probably a series would make sense.
For a series do a git commit -s on the changed files that make up your core change and then do a second git commit -s on the additional changed files. Then do a git format-patch -o ..... command and it will create two patch files 0001.... and 0002.... from the two commits. Hopefully that is clear enough.
Alright, I will try a series then. With the first just an upgrade, keeping the customization of Alexander intact, and next one 'upgrading' those customizations for compatibility with my own Zabbix monitoring template (currently available on my github and on share.zabbix.com).
I would also say that if you make your best effort with your submission you will get feedback on if you should have done it differently but it will be friendly constructive feedback. I have had that sort of feedback myself and it has always been an opportunity to learn and do better the following time.
Looking forward to it :-)
I look forwards to seeing your update successfully getting into Core Update 156.
I'll do my best releasing my patch serie in the next few days..
And if I understand correctly, as you can currently select in the webUI which 'branch' pakfire should use as source, I will be able to install my version of the package from the "Unstable" branch on a stable IPFire instance as soon as my patches are approved and committed ?
Thanks!
Regards Robin
Hi Robin,
On 28/03/2021 23:41, Robin Roevens wrote:
Hi Adolf
Thanks for the feedback.
Glad to help.
Adolf Belka schreef op zo 28-03-2021 om 22:21 [+0200]:
So I'm assuming ${NAME} is not available when I manually run install.sh as per instructions, and that it will be available when pakfire itself installs the package?
That is correct in both cases.
Is there a way to test the actual package deployment using pakfire ?
When I am testing a package what I do is run the following commands first:-
NAME="zabbix_agentd"
export NAME
That then sets $NAME to your package name and should make all commands that use $NAME work successfully.
Hopefully that will also help you.
Ok, that should indeed do the trick then. I added it to the testing example in the wiki page, so that is clear for future package maintainers following those instructions.
Excellent.
Then I have a few other questions:
- In the LFS template there is a PAK_VER variable, and it is not
clear to me what this exactly is. Is this a revision number for current packaged version? or just a 'counter' for how many package versions there have been for this program in IPFire ?
In IPFire 2.x it is used as a continuously incrementing counter so you should set it one higher than the previous version. It never resets. (That is different to what the aim is for IPFire 3 but that is still under development).
Thanks for the clarification. The wiki page didn't mention PAK_VER, so I also added that to the page.
- In the LFS template for current zabbix_agentd v4.2.6 DL_FROM is
pointing to URL_IPFIRE.. Should this be changed ? Or should I upload the new source-file for v5.0.9 to URL_IPFIRE in some way ? (are there instructions somewhere?) or ..?
Leave that as it is and when you run ./make.sh downloadsrc if it completes successfully then it means that the new version you are using was successfully downloaded by the IPFire source system. IPFire keeps a copy on their system of all source tarballs in case the original versions have a problem.
Ok. But then how will the IPFire source system know from where to download the original source tarball to keep as a copy ? Do I have to request the file to be added to URL_IPFIRE supplying the source url on this mailing list, or in the patch comments? Or do I put the copy of the source there myself some way ?
As I understand it:- The first time a new addon is submitted then the URL_IPFIRE is replaced with the url for the tarball source location. After that then the IPFIre system basically uses the same source location to look for the new version number you provide. There is only a problem if the url for the source location is changed.
Then a more practical question: Next to 'just' an upgrade of the current Zabbix agent I also added a few config files etc for use with my Zabbix IPFire specific monitoring template. This changes Alexander's original config a little, but should remain backwards compatible. Should I submit this as 2 separate patches or will a single patch suffice?
I think the core devs prefer changes separated but it depends, they would be best to comment on that.
I think it depends on how closely integrated the changes are. You can do them as a single patch, you can do them as a series of patches [PATCH 1/2] and [PATCH 2/2] or as completely separate patches. To me it sounds like probably a series would make sense.
For a series do a git commit -s on the changed files that make up your core change and then do a second git commit -s on the additional changed files. Then do a git format-patch -o ..... command and it will create two patch files 0001.... and 0002.... from the two commits. Hopefully that is clear enough.
Alright, I will try a series then. With the first just an upgrade, keeping the customization of Alexander intact, and next one 'upgrading' those customizations for compatibility with my own Zabbix monitoring template (currently available on my github and on share.zabbix.com).
I would also say that if you make your best effort with your submission you will get feedback on if you should have done it differently but it will be friendly constructive feedback. I have had that sort of feedback myself and it has always been an opportunity to learn and do better the following time.
Looking forward to it :-)
I look forwards to seeing your update successfully getting into Core Update 156.
I'll do my best releasing my patch serie in the next few days..
And if I understand correctly, as you can currently select in the webUI which 'branch' pakfire should use as source, I will be able to install my version of the package from the "Unstable" branch on a stable IPFire instance as soon as my patches are approved and committed ?
Yes that is true. However it is named unstable and things do break occasionally.
Thanks!
Regards Robin
-
Adolf Belka -
Robin Roevens