ipmitool 1.8.13 needs 2 patches for OpenPower systems

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. It seems that your bug report is not filed about a specific source package though, rather it is just filed against Ubuntu in general. It is important that bug reports be filed about source packages so that people interested in the package can find the bugs about it. You can find some hints about determining what package your bug might be about at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/FindRightPackage. You might also ask for help in the #ubuntu-bugs irc channel on Freenode.

To change the source package that this bug is filed about visit https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1481780/+editstatus and add the package name in the text box next to the word Package.

[This is an automated message. I apologize if it reached you inappropriately; please just reply to this message indicating so.]

Attached is the 1.8.13 ipmitool patch for the USB interface layer

The attachment "ipmitool-1.8.13_usb_interface_diff.diff" seems to be a patch. If it isn't, please remove the "patch" flag from the attachment, remove the "patch" tag, and if you are a member of the ~ubuntu-reviewers, unsubscribe the team.

[This is an automated message performed by a Launchpad user owned by ~brian-murray, for any issues please contact him.]

Attached is the hpm upload issue that we resolved

This bug was fixed in the package ipmitool - 1.8.15-1ubuntu1

---------------
ipmitool (1.8.15-1ubuntu1) wily; urgency=medium

  * debian/patches/memcpy_hpm_fix.patch: fix wrong memcpy boundary parameter in
    HpmFwupgActionUploadFirmware(). (LP: #1481780)
  * debian/patches/usb_interface_support.patch: add USB interface support.
    (LP: #1481780)

 -- Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre <email address hidden> Mon, 10 Aug 2015 19:54:06 -0400

Hello bugproxy, or anyone else affected,

Accepted ipmitool into vivid-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ipmitool/1.8.15-1ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Send an email to David, from AMI, to validate this 1.8.15 fixed version.
Thanks!

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Launchpad Bug Tracker <
<email address hidden>> wrote:

> ** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/vivid-proposed/ipmitool
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug
> report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1481780
>
> Title:
> ipmitool 1.8.13 needs 2 patches for OpenPower systems
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ipmitool/+bug/1481780/+subscriptions
>

Attaching output log from the https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ipmitool/1.8.15-1ubuntu0.1 ipmitool

Verifed both the USB interface support and HPM update patch are working correctly

Hello bugproxy, or anyone else affected,

Accepted ipmitool into trusty-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ipmitool/1.8.13-1ubuntu0.3 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Default Comment by Bridge

There is a new bug regarding this one https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ipmitool/+bug/1486931

This bug was fixed in the package ipmitool - 1.8.13-1ubuntu0.3

---------------
ipmitool (1.8.13-1ubuntu0.3) trusty; urgency=medium

  * debian/patches/memcpy_hpm_fix.patch: fix wrong memcpy boundary parameter in
    HpmFwupgActionUploadFirmware(). (LP: #1481780)
  * debian/patches/usb_interface_support.patch: add USB interface support.
    (LP: #1481780)

 -- Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre <email address hidden> Mon, 10 Aug 2015 21:15:35 -0400

The verification of the Stable Release Update for ipmitool has completed successfully and the package has now been released to -updates. Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In the event that you encounter a regression using the package from -updates please report a new bug using ubuntu-bug and tag the bug report regression-update so we can easily find any regressions.

This bug was fixed in the package ipmitool - 1.8.15-1ubuntu0.1

---------------
ipmitool (1.8.15-1ubuntu0.1) vivid; urgency=medium

  * debian/patches/memcpy_hpm_fix.patch: fix wrong memcpy boundary parameter in
    HpmFwupgActionUploadFirmware(). (LP: #1481780)
  * debian/patches/usb_interface_support.patch: add USB interface support.
    (LP: #1481780)

 -- Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre <email address hidden> Mon, 10 Aug 2015 19:54:06 -0400

Attached is the ipmitool-1.8.13-1_usb+hpm_fixes-patch.diff file which contains the usb interface support all the hpm fixes required for the large buffer size.

Thanks David, I've tried the patch on the latest ipmitool source but I have a few problems :
- the patch does not apply on top of the already existing patch_memcpy_param.patch : I removed the latter from ubuntu debian/patches and I could apply all the series.
- when I compile the package I got this :

make[3]: Entering directory `/home/ubuntu/tmp/ipmitool-1.8.13/lib'
/bin/bash ../libtool --silent --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I../include -g -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wreturn-type -I /lib/modules/3.16.0-45-generic/build/include -MT helper.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/helper.Tpo -c -o helper.lo helper.c
In file included from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/ptrace.h:27:0,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/sigcontext.h:11,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/bits/sigcontext.h:27,
                 from /usr/include/signal.h:332,
                 from helper.c:41:
/lib/modules/3.16.0-45-generic/build/include/linux/types.h:14:26: error: conflicting types for 'fd_set'
 typedef __kernel_fd_set fd_set;
                          ^
In file included from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/sys/types.h:219:0,
                 from helper.c:33:
/usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/sys/select.h:75:5: note: previous declaration of 'fd_set' was here
   } fd_set;
     ^
In file included from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/ptrace.h:27:0,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/sigcontext.h:11,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/bits/sigcontext.h:27,
                 from /usr/include/signal.h:332,
                 from helper.c:41:
/lib/modules/3.16.0-45-generic/build/include/linux/types.h:15:25: error: conflicting types for 'dev_t'
 typedef __kernel_dev_t dev_t;
                         ^
In file included from helper.c:33:0:
/usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/sys/types.h:60:17: note: previous declaration of 'dev_t' was here
 typedef __dev_t dev_t;
                 ^
In file included from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/ptrace.h:27:0,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/sigcontext.h:11,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/bits/sigcontext.h:27,
                 from /usr/include/signal.h:332,
                 from helper.c:41:
/lib/modules/3.16.0-45-generic/build/include/linux/types.h:19:17: error: conflicting types for 'nlink_t'
 typedef __u32 nlink_t;
                 ^
In file included from helper.c:33:0:
/usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/sys/types.h:75:19: note: previous declaration of 'nlink_t' was here
 typedef __nlink_t nlink_t;
                   ^
In file included from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/ptrace.h:27:0,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/sigcontext.h:11,
                 from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/bits/sigcontext.h:27,
                 from /usr/include/signal.h:332,
                 from helper.c:41:
/lib/modules/3.16.0-45-generic/build/include/linux/types.h:25:26: error: conflicting types for 'timer_t'
 typedef __kernel_timer_t timer_t;
                          ^
In file included from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux...

Let's consider this bug as fixed, and continue the discussion of the new patch at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ipmitool/+bug/1486931

Hello bugproxy, or anyone else affected,

Accepted ipmitool into trusty-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ipmitool/1.8.13-1ubuntu0.5 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Default Comment by Bridge