Bug#846597: linux: please enable `perf data' support

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc>]

On 2017-01-26 16:36:45 [+0100], Hector Oron wrote:
> Hello,
Hi,

> On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 02:37:21PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > diff --git a/debian/templates/control.source.in b/debian/templates/control.source.in
> > index 08969a3da9d9..2a1fdf048823 100644
> > --- a/debian/templates/control.source.in
> > +++ b/debian/templates/control.source.in
> > @@ -41,6 +41,8 @@ Standards-Version: 3.9.8
> >   libperl-dev <!stage1 !pkg.linux.notools !nopython>,
> >   libunwind8-dev [amd64 armel armhf arm64 i386] <!stage1 !pkg.linux.notools !nopython>,
> >   python-dev <!stage1 !pkg.linux.notools !nopython>,
> > + libbabeltrace-dev <!stage1 !pkg.linux.notools !nopython>,
> > + libbabeltrace-ctf-dev <!stage1 !pkg.linux.notools !nopython>,
> 
> Out of curiosity,
> 
> The final patch that got merged has versioned depends on babeltrace >=1.5.0, but
> Jessie has 1.2.3. While trying to do a linux kernel backport, I have come up
> with a question if we really need babeltrace >=1.5.0 or if 1.2.3 has the needed
> features. Do you happen to know?

You need babeltrace >= 1.5.0 for perf-data to work and that was the
whole point of libbabeltrace.
If you don't care about perf-data you can drop that babeltrace
dependency (and not enable it later while building perf).
I am happy that the next stable will bring working perf-data
to Debian and I don't need it in backports (as it will introduce yet
another library).

> Note: In anycase, I am preparing a backport of babeltrace.
> 
> Regards

Sebastian