From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6A761FF0A8 for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2026 15:46:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AE52A21581; Thu, 20 Aug 2026 15:46:30 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 15:46:17 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox v3 1/5] system-report: add crate for shared report generation From: "Lukas Wagner" To: "Christian Ebner" , "Lukas Wagner" , "Erik Fastermann" , , X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-0-g5549850facc2-dirty References: <20260811114332.283776-1-e.fastermann@proxmox.com> <20260811114332.283776-2-e.fastermann@proxmox.com> <3bdff658-0aad-445a-bf4b-647a5e49371b@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <3bdff658-0aad-445a-bf4b-647a5e49371b@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1787233552242 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.781 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: NMER2LLE37QW7JBVTJ342UPP6L7ILSSW X-Message-ID-Hash: NMER2LLE37QW7JBVTJ342UPP6L7ILSSW X-MailFrom: l.wagner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu Aug 20, 2026 at 3:36 PM CEST, Christian Ebner wrote: > On 8/20/26 3:31 PM, Lukas Wagner wrote: >> Hi Erik, >>=20 >> thanks a lot for tackling this! >>=20 >> On Tue Aug 11, 2026 at 1:43 PM CEST, Erik Fastermann wrote: >>> Factor the shared report generation from PBS and PDM into a new >>> proxmox-system-report crate, so both generate their reports from a >>> single implementation. >>> >>> The crate defines the common section order (FILES, COMMANDS, >>> FUNCTIONS) and the set of general commands run on every product; >>> products pass their own additional files, commands and functions on >>> top. It produces no report on its own, so the user-visible changes >>> land in the respective server packages. >>> >>> Suggested-by: Lukas Wagner >>> Suggested-by: Christian Ebner >>> Reviewed-by: Christian Ebner >>> Tested-by: Christian Ebner >>> Signed-off-by: Erik Fastermann >>> --- >>> Cargo.toml | 2 + >>> proxmox-system-report/Cargo.toml | 16 ++ >>> proxmox-system-report/debian/control | 36 ++++ >>> proxmox-system-report/debian/copyright | 18 ++ >>> proxmox-system-report/debian/debcargo.toml | 7 + >>> proxmox-system-report/src/lib.rs | 239 ++++++++++++++++++++= + >>> 6 files changed, 318 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 proxmox-system-report/Cargo.toml >>> create mode 100644 proxmox-system-report/debian/control >>> create mode 100644 proxmox-system-report/debian/copyright >>> create mode 100644 proxmox-system-report/debian/debcargo.toml >>=20 >> This is missing a debian/changelog file, without it >> `make proxmox-sytem-report-deb` does not work. >> > > That's on me: I suggested to leave it out for the maintainer to set, as= =20 > it will be outdated anyways, see=20 > https://lore.proxmox.com/pbs-devel/4d0f692b-29a9-4951-830e-efe145f7bbdd@p= roxmox.com/ > > [..] Ah, sorry, I did not see the former email chain. I'm not a packaging pro, but could it make sense to set it to UNRELEASED at first, and then the maintainer can use `dch -r` to release, which should also update the timestamp (see `man dch` for reference). so, as s full example: rust-proxmox-system-report (1.0.0-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=3Dmedium * initial version. -- Proxmox Support Team Sun, 30 Nov 2025 16:52:02 += 0100 Obviously, this is for proxmox.git maintainers to decide.