[ITA] procps

[ITA] procps

[Wayne Porter]

I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with
the community.

procps-3.3.9-1.tar.xz
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6jD_6qfO1gMeEFVdUFyY0hqc0k/view?usp=sharing

procps-3.3.9-1-src.tar.xz
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6jD_6qfO1gMZW5yU0ZnSVR6ZVk/view?usp=sharing

procps-debuginfo-3.3.9-1.tar.xz
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6jD_6qfO1gMam4wbk5Mb2w3T3c/view?usp=sharing

I don't have anywhere to upload the files directly to so I hope Google
Drive links are not too frowned upon.

Thank you for your consideration.


Original source from https://gitlab.com/procps-ng/procps

Debian stable info: https://packages.debian.org/jessie/procps

setup.hint:

category: System
requires: cygwin libncursesw10 pkg-config
sdesc: "System and process monitoring utilities"
ldesc: "This package provides command line and full screen utilities
for browsing procfs, a pseudo file system dynamically generated by the
kernel to provide information about the status of entries in its
process table (such as whether the process is running, stopped, or a
zombie).
It contains free, kill, pkill, pgrep, pmap, ps, pwdx, slabtop, sysctl,
tload, top, uptime, vmstat, w, and watch"

-- 
Wayne Porter

Re: [ITA] procps

[Achim Gratz]

Wayne Porter writes:
> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with
> the community.

That's actually procps-ng or is it not?  If so, it seems the current
version is 3.3.11 from looking at my Linux box.

Also, the current procps maintainer is quite active on the Cygwin ml, so
it would have been a good idea to ask for an update first before doing
an ITA.  :-)


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Waldorf MIDI Implementation & additional documentation:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfDocs

Re: [ITA] procps

[Wayne Porter]

I'm new to this community so I wasn't sure if I went about this the proper way. 3.3.11 is the latest but is not listed as stable in the debian package list. I was going by the guidelines on the contribution page that for it to be considered for the repos that it has to be.


On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> wrote:
>Wayne Porter writes:
>> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with
>> the community.
>
>That's actually procps-ng or is it not?  If so, it seems the current
>version is 3.3.11 from looking at my Linux box.
>
>Also, the current procps maintainer is quite active on the Cygwin ml,
>so
>it would have been a good idea to ask for an update first before doing
>an ITA.  :-)
>
>
>Regards,
>Achim.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [ITA] procps

[Marco Atzeri]

On 16/03/2016 08:14, Wayne Porter wrote:
> I'm new to this community so I wasn't sure if I went about this the proper way. 3.3.11 is the latest but is not listed as stable in the debian package list. I was going by the guidelines on the contribution page that for it to be considered for the repos that it has to be.
>

Usually you can only adopt orphan package.
In this case procps is not orphan but it has a very active maintainer
https://www.cygwin.com/cygwin-pkg-maint


> On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> wrote:
>> Wayne Porter writes:
>>> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with
>>> the community.
>>
>> That's actually procps-ng or is it not?  If so, it seems the current
>> version is 3.3.11 from looking at my Linux box.
>>
>> Also, the current procps maintainer is quite active on the Cygwin ml,
>> so
>> it would have been a good idea to ask for an update first before doing
>> an ITA.  :-)
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Achim.
>

Re: [ITA] procps

[Wayne Porter]

Ok, good to know. I was working on this as an exercise in porting code and saw that the current version was quite old. Should I email the current maintainer directly instead of putting it out on the mailing list?


On March 16, 2016 12:35:06 AM PDT, Marco Atzeri <marco.atzeri@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 16/03/2016 08:14, Wayne Porter wrote:
>> I'm new to this community so I wasn't sure if I went about this the
>proper way. 3.3.11 is the latest but is not listed as stable in the
>debian package list. I was going by the guidelines on the contribution
>page that for it to be considered for the repos that it has to be.
>>
>
>Usually you can only adopt orphan package.
>In this case procps is not orphan but it has a very active maintainer
>https://www.cygwin.com/cygwin-pkg-maint
>
>
>> On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de>
>wrote:
>>> Wayne Porter writes:
>>>> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it
>with
>>>> the community.
>>>
>>> That's actually procps-ng or is it not?  If so, it seems the current
>>> version is 3.3.11 from looking at my Linux box.
>>>
>>> Also, the current procps maintainer is quite active on the Cygwin
>ml,
>>> so
>>> it would have been a good idea to ask for an update first before
>doing
>>> an ITA.  :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Achim.
>>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [ITA] procps

[Marco Atzeri]

On 16/03/2016 08:42, Wayne Porter wrote:
> Ok, good to know. I was working on this as an exercise in porting code and saw that the current version was quite old. Should I email the current maintainer directly instead of putting it out on the mailing list?
>
>

Hi Wayne,
please note

#1 never send direct mail to maintainers. Use this list or the main one.
#2 bottom posting is the standard in this mailing list.

I assume Corinna will read this thread anyway.

Feel free to adopt any real ORPHAN package.


Regards
Marco

Re: [ITA] procps

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1697 bytes --]

On Mar 16 00:14, Wayne Porter wrote:
> 
> On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> wrote:
> >Wayne Porter writes:
> >> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with
> >> the community.
> >
> >That's actually procps-ng or is it not?  If so, it seems the current
> >version is 3.3.11 from looking at my Linux box.
> >
> >Also, the current procps maintainer is quite active on the Cygwin ml,
> >so
> >it would have been a good idea to ask for an update first before doing
> >an ITA.  :-)
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >Achim.
> 
> I'm new to this community so I wasn't sure if I went about this the
> proper way. 3.3.11 is the latest but is not listed as stable in the
> debian package list. I was going by the guidelines on the contribution
> page that for it to be considered for the repos that it has to be.

Don't worry about that for now.  As the others pointed out, I'm the
current procps maintainer.  I have no problems to give up procps
maintainership, but I don't think this is necessary here in the first
place.

The reason is: Your package is in fact procps-ng, and from my POV it
should stick to this name as in various Linux distros.  My procps code
is from the older codebase.  I never felt a good reason to port the
newer procps-ng codebase to Cygwin, so this is a welcome package.

I happily give up procps in favor of procps-ng, as long as it works as
desired.

So, please go ahead with your ITP per the other maintainers request.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [ITA] procps

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1856 bytes --]

On Mar 16 10:33, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 16 00:14, Wayne Porter wrote:
> > 
> > On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> wrote:
> > >Wayne Porter writes:
> > >> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with
> > >> the community.
> > >
> > >That's actually procps-ng or is it not?  If so, it seems the current
> > >version is 3.3.11 from looking at my Linux box.
> > >
> > >Also, the current procps maintainer is quite active on the Cygwin ml,
> > >so
> > >it would have been a good idea to ask for an update first before doing
> > >an ITA.  :-)
> > >
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Achim.
> > 
> > I'm new to this community so I wasn't sure if I went about this the
> > proper way. 3.3.11 is the latest but is not listed as stable in the
> > debian package list. I was going by the guidelines on the contribution
> > page that for it to be considered for the repos that it has to be.
> 
> Don't worry about that for now.  As the others pointed out, I'm the
> current procps maintainer.  I have no problems to give up procps
> maintainership, but I don't think this is necessary here in the first
> place.
> 
> The reason is: Your package is in fact procps-ng, and from my POV it
> should stick to this name as in various Linux distros.  My procps code
> is from the older codebase.  I never felt a good reason to port the

s/reason/motivation/

Yeah, that's better.

> newer procps-ng codebase to Cygwin, so this is a welcome package.
> 
> I happily give up procps in favor of procps-ng, as long as it works as
> desired.
> 
> So, please go ahead with your ITP per the other maintainers request.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]