Recently I ve been curious about how hibernation works on Linux, as it s an interesting interaction between hardware and software. There are some notes in the Arch wiki and the kernel documentation (as well as some kernel documentation on debugging hibernation and on sleep states more generally), and of course the ACPI Specification

The Formal Definition ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) is, according to the spec, an architecture-independent power management and configuration framework that forms a subsystem within the host OS which defines a hardware register set to define power states. ACPI defines four global system states G0, working/on, G1, sleeping, G2, soft off, and G3, mechanical off¹. Within G1 there are 4 sleep states, numbered S1 through S4. There are also S0 and S5, which are equivalent to G0 and G2 respectively².

Sleep According to the spec, the ACPI S1-S4 states all do the same thing from the operating system s perspective, but each saves progressively more power, so the operating system is expected to pick the deepest of these states when entering sleep. However, most operating systems³ distinguish between S1-S3, which are typically referred to as sleep or suspend, and S4, which is typically referred to as hibernation.

S1: CPU Stop and Cache Wipe The CPU caches are wiped and then the CPU is stopped, which the spec notes is equivalent to the WBINVD instruction followed by the STPCLK signal on x86. However, nothing is powered off.

S2: Processor Power off The system stops the processor and most system clocks (except the real time clock), then powers off the processor. Upon waking, the processor will not continue what it was doing before, but instead use its reset vector⁴.

S3: Suspend/Sleep (Suspend-to-RAM) Mostly equivalent to S2, but hardware ensures that only memory and whatever other hardware memory requires are powered.

S4: Hibernate (Suspend-to-Disk) In this state, all hardware is completely powered off and an image of the system is written to disk, to be restored from upon reapplying power. Writing the system image to disk can be handled by the operating system if supported, or by the firmware.

Linux Sleep States Linux has its own set of sleep states which mostly correspond with ACPI states.

Suspend-to-Idle This is a software only sleep that puts all hardware into the lowest power state it can, suspends timekeeping, and freezes userspace processes. All userspace and some kernel threads⁵, except those tagged with PF_NOFREEZE, are frozen before the system enters a sleep state. Frozen tasks are sent to the __refrigerator(), where they set TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE and PF_FROZEN and infinitely loop until PF_FROZEN is unset⁶. This prevents these tasks from doing anything during the imaging process. Any userspace process running on a different CPU while the kernel is trying to create a memory image would cause havoc. This is also done because any filesystem changes made during this would be lost and could cause the filesystem and its related in-memory structures to become inconsistent. Also, creating a hibernation image requires about 50% of memory free, so no tasks should be allocating memory, which freezing also prevents.

Standby This is equivalent to ACPI S1.

Suspend-to-RAM This is equivalent to ACPI S3.

Hibernation Hibernation is mostly equivalent to ACPI S4 but does not require S4, only requiring low-level code for resuming the system to be present for the underlying CPU architecture according to the Linux sleep state docs. To hibernate, everything is stopped and the kernel takes a snapshot of memory. Then, the system writes out the memory image to disk. Finally, the system either enters S4 or turns off completely. When the system restores power it boots a new kernel, which looks for a hibernation image and loads it into memory. It then overwrites itself with the hibernation image and jumps to a resume area of the original kernel⁷. The resumed kernel restores the system to its previous state and resumes all processes.

Hybrid Suspend Hybrid suspend does not correspond to an official ACPI state, but instead is effectively a combination of S3 and S4. The system writes out a hibernation image, but then enters suspend-to-RAM. If the system wakes up from suspend it will discard the hibernation image, but if the system loses power it can safely restore from the hibernation image.

1. The difference between soft and mechanical off is that mechanical off is entered and left by a mechanical means (for example, turning off the system s power through the movement of a large red switch)
2. It s unclear to me why G and S states overlap like this. I assume this is a relic of an older spec that only had S states, but I have not as yet found any evidence of this. If someone has any information on this, please let me know and I ll update this footnote.
3. Of the operating systems I know of that support ACPI sleep states (I checked Windows, Mac, Linux, and the three BSDs⁸), only MacOS does not allow the user to deliberately enable hibernation, instead supporting a hybrid suspend it calls safe sleep
4. The reset vector of a processor is the default location where, upon a reset, the processor will go to find the first instruction to execute. In other words, the reset vector is a pointer or address where the processor should always begin its execution. This first instruction typically branches to the system initialization code. Xiaocong Fan, Real-Time Embedded Systems, 2015
5. All kernel threads are tagged with PF_NOFREEZE by default, so they must specifically opt-in to task freezing.
6. This is not from the docs, but from kernel/freezer.c which also notes Refrigerator is place where frozen processes are stored :-).
7. This is the operation that requires special architecture-specific low-level code .
8. Interestingly NetBSD has a setting to enable hibernation, but does not actually support hibernation

Welcome to the December 2021 report from the Reproducible Builds project! In these reports, we try and summarise what we have been up to over the past month, as well as what else has been occurring in the world of software supply-chain security. As a quick recap of what reproducible builds is trying to address, whilst anyone may inspect the source code of free software for malicious flaws, almost all software is distributed to end users as pre-compiled binaries. The motivation behind the reproducible builds effort is to ensure no flaws have been introduced during this compilation process by promising identical results are always generated from a given source, thus allowing multiple third-parties to come to a consensus on whether a build was compromised. As always, if you would like to contribute to the project, please get in touch with us directly or visit the Contribute page on our website.
Early in December, Julien Voisin blogged about setting up a rebuilderd instance in order to reproduce Tails images. Working on previous work from 2018, Julien has now set up a public-facing instance which is providing build attestations. As Julien dryly notes in his post, Currently, this isn t really super-useful to anyone, except maybe some Tails developers who want to check that the release manager didn t backdoor the released image. Naturally, we would contend sincerely that this is indeed useful.
The secure/anonymous Tor browser now supports reproducible source releases. According to the project s changelog, version 0.4.7.3-alpha of Tor can now build reproducible tarballs via the make dist-reprod command. This issue was tracked via Tor issue #26299.
Fabian Keil posted a question to our mailing list this month asking how they might analyse differences in images produced with the FreeBSD and ElectroBSD s mkimg and makefs commands:

After rebasing ElectroBSD from FreeBSD stable/11 to stable/12
I recently noticed that the "memstick" images are unfortunately
still not 100% reproducible.

Fabian s original post generated a short back-and-forth with Chris Lamb regarding how diffoscope might be able to support the particular format of images generated by this command set.

diffoscope diffoscope is our in-depth and content-aware diff utility. Not only can it locate and diagnose reproducibility issues, it can provide human-readable diffs from many kinds of binary formats. This month, Chris Lamb prepared and uploading versions 195, 196, 197 and 198 to Debian, as well as made the following changes:

• Support showing Ordering differences only within .dsc field values. [ ]
• Add support for XMLb files. [ ]
• Also add, for example, /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu to our local binary search path. [ ]
• Support OCaml versions 4.11, 4.12 and 4.13. [ ]
• Drop some unnecessary has_same_content_as logging calls. [ ]
• Replace token variable with an anonymously-named variable instead to remove extra lines. [ ]
• Don t use the runtime platform s native endianness when unpacking .pyc files. This fixes test failures on big-endian machines. [ ]

Mattia Rizzolo also made a number of changes to diffoscope this month as well, such as:

• Also recognize GnuCash files as XML. [ ]
• Support the pgpdump PGP packet visualiser version 0.34. [ ]
• Ignore the new Lintian tag binary-with-bad-dynamic-table. [ ]
• Fix the Enhances field in debian/control. [ ]

Finally, Brent Spillner fixed the version detection for Black uncompromising code formatter [ ], Jelle van der Waa added an external tool reference for Arch Linux [ ] and Roland Clobus added support for reporting when the GNU_BUILD_ID field has been modified [ ]. Thank you for your contributions!

Distribution work In Debian this month, 70 reviews of packages were added, 27 were updated and 41 were removed, adding to our database of knowledge about specific issues. A number of issue types were created as well, including:

• build_path_identifiers_in_documentation_generated_by_doxygen
• non_deterministic_doc_base_file_for_javadoc
• nondeterministic_ordering_in_guile_binaries

strip-nondeterminism version 1.13.0-1 was uploaded to Debian unstable by Holger Levsen. It included contributions already covered in previous months as well as new ones from Mattia Rizzolo, particularly that the dh_strip_nondeterminism Debian integration interface uses the new get_non_binnmu_date_epoch() utility when available: this is important to ensure that strip-nondeterminism does not break some kinds of binNMUs.
In the world of openSUSE, however, Bernhard M. Wiedemann posted his monthly reproducible builds status report.
In NixOS, work towards the longer-term goal of making the graphical installation image reproducible is ongoing. For example, Artturin made the gnome-desktop package reproducible.

Upstream patches The Reproducible Builds project attempts to fix as many currently-unreproducible packages as possible. In December, we wrote a large number of such patches, including:

• Bernhard M. Wiedemann:
  • g++7/rsync (randomness in output)
  • python-eventlet (build fails in the future)
  • python-PyQRCode (incorporates copyright year)
• Chris Lamb:
  • #1001227 filed against locust.
  • #1001277 filed against cwltool.
  • #1001553 filed against mate-submodules.
• Simon McVittie:
  • #1001210 filed against ksh93u+m.
  • #1001223 filed against dx.
• Vagrant Cascadian:
  • #1000944 filed against apbs.
  • #1000945 filed against binutils-riscv64-unknown-elf.
  • #1000946 filed against gcc-riscv64-unknown-elf.
  • #1001850 filed against userbindmount.
  • #1001853 filed against nanomsg.
  • #1001854 filed against freediameter.
  • #1001856 filed against gr-satellites.
  • #1001859 filed against kjs.
  • #1001860 filed against xeus-python.
  • #1001866 filed against libime.
  • #1001867 filed against fcitx5-gtk.
  • #1001868 filed against fcitx.
  • #1001869 filed against libpodofo.
  • #1001870 filed against meshlab.
  • #1001872 filed against eiskaltdcpp.
  • #1001873 filed against editorconfig-core.
  • #1002671 filed against python-parse-type.
  • #1002673 filed against sphinx-copybutton.
  • #1002674 filed against fcitx5-qt.
• Roland Clobus:
  • libxmlb#110 filed upstream against libxmlb, fixed by Richard Hughes. Waiting for an upstream release.

Testing framework The Reproducible Builds project runs a significant testing framework at tests.reproducible-builds.org, to check packages and other artifacts for reproducibility. This month, the following changes were made:

• Holger Levsen:
  • Run the Debian scheduler less often. [ ]
  • Fix the name of the Debian testing suite name. [ ]
  • Detect builds that are rescheduling due to problems with the diffoscope container. [ ]
  • No longer special-case particular machines having a different /boot partition size. [ ]
  • Automatically fix failed apt-daily and apt-daily-upgrade services [ ], failed e2scrub_all.service & user@ systemd units [ ][ ] as well as generic build failures [ ].
  • Simplify a script to powercycle arm64 architecture nodes hosted at/by codethink.co.uk. [ ]
  • Detect if the udd-mirror.debian.net service is down. [ ]
  • Various miscellaneous node maintenance. [ ][ ]
• Roland Clobus (Debian live image generation):
  • If the latest snapshot is not complete yet, try to use the previous snapshot instead. [ ]
  • Minor: whitespace correction + comment correction. [ ]
  • Use unique folders and reports for each Debian version. [ ]
  • Turn off debugging. [ ]
  • Add a better error description for incorrect/missing arguments. [ ]
  • Report non-reproducible issues in Debian sid images. [ ]

Lastly, Mattia Rizzolo updated the automatic logfile parsing rules in a number of ways (eg. to ignore a warning about the Python setuptools deprecation) [ ][ ] and Vagrant Cascadian adjusted the config for the Squid caching proxy on a node. [ ]

---

If you are interested in contributing to the Reproducible Builds project, please visit our Contribute page on our website. However, you can get in touch with us via:

• Mailing list: rb-general@lists.reproducible-builds.org
• IRC: #reproducible-builds on irc.oftc.net.
• Mastodon: @reproducible_builds@fosstodon.org

tl;dr: Faithfully following upstream semver, in Debian package dependencies, is a bad idea. Introduction I have been involved in Debian for a very long time. And I ve been working with Rust for a few years now. Late last year I had cause to try to work on Rust things within Debian. When I did, I found it very difficult. The Debian Rust Team were very helpful. However, the workflow and tooling require very large amounts of manual clerical work - work which it is almost impossible to do correctly since the information required does not exist. I had wanted to package a fairly straightforward program I had written in Rust, partly as a learning exercise. But, unfortunately, after I got stuck in, it looked to me like the effort would be wildly greater than I was prepared for, so I gave up. Since then I ve been thinking about what I learned about how Rust is packaged in Debian. I think I can see how to fix some of the problems. Although I don t want to go charging in and try to tell everyone how to do things, I felt I ought at least to write up my ideas. Hence this blog post, which may become the first of a series. This post is going to be about semver handling. I see problems with other aspects of dependency handling and source code management and traceability as well, and of course if my ideas find favour in principle, there are a lot of details that need to be worked out, including some kind of transition plan. How Debian packages Rust, and build vs runtime dependencies Today I will be discussing almost entirely build-dependencies; Rust doesn t (yet?) support dynamic linking, so built Rust binaries don t have Rusty dependencies. However, things are a bit confusing because even the Debian binary packages for Rust libraries contain pure source code. So for a Rust library package, building the Debian binary package from the Debian source package does not involve running the Rust compiler; it s just file-copying and format conversion. The library s Rust dependencies do not need to be installed on the build machine for this. So I m mostly going to be talking about Depends fields, which are Debian s way of talking about runtime dependencies, even though they are used only at build-time. The way this works is that some ultimate leaf package (which is supposed to produce actual executable code) Build-Depends on the libraries it needs, and those Depends on their under-libraries, so that everything needed is installed. What do dependencies mean and what are they for anyway? In systems where packages declare dependencies on other packages, it generally becomes necessary to support versioned dependencies. In all but the most simple systems, this involves an ordering (or similar) on version numbers and a way for a package A to specify that it depends on certain versions of B. Both Debian and Rust have this. Rust upstream crates have version numbers and can specify their dependencies according to semver. Debian s dependency system can represent that. So it was natural for the designers of the scheme for packaging Rust code in Debian to simply translate the Rust version dependencies to Debian ones. However, while the two dependency schemes seem equivalent in the abstract, their concrete real-world semantics are totally different. These different package management systems have different practices and different meanings for dependencies. (Interestingly, the Python world also has debates about the meaning and proper use of dependency versions.) The epistemological problem Consider some package A which is known to depend on B. In general, it is not trivial to know which versions of B will be satisfactory. I.e., whether a new B, with potentially-breaking changes, will actually break A. Sometimes tooling can be used which calculates this (eg, the Debian shlibdeps system for runtime dependencies) but this is unusual - especially for build-time dependencies. Which versions of B are OK can normally only be discovered by a human consideration of changelogs etc., or by having a computer try particular combinations. Few ecosystems with dependencies, in the Free Software community at least, make an attempt to precisely calculate the versions of B that are actually required to build some A. So it turns out that there are three cases for a particular combination of A and B: it is believed to work; it is known not to work; and: it is not known whether it will work. And, I am not aware of any dependency system that has an explicit machine-readable representation for the unknown state, so that they can say something like A is known to depend on B; versions of B before v1 are known to break; version v2 is known to work . (Sometimes statements like that can be found in human-readable docs.) That leaves two possibilities for the semantics of a dependency A depends B, version(s) V..W: Precise: A will definitely work if B matches V..W, and Optimistic: We have no reason to think B breaks with any of V..W. At first sight the latter does not seem useful, since how would the package manager find a working combination? Taking Debian as an example, which uses optimistic version dependencies, the answer is as follows: The primary information about what package versions to use is not only the dependencies, but mostly in which Debian release is being targeted. (Other systems using optimistic version dependencies could use the date of the build, i.e. use only packages that are current .)

	Precise	Optimistic
People involved in version management	Package developers, downstream developers/users.	Package developers, downstream developer/users, distribution QA and release managers.
Package developers declare versions V and dependency ranges V..W so that	It definitely works.	A wide range of B can satisfy the declared requirement.
The principal version data used by the package manager	Only dependency versions.	Contextual, eg, Releases - set(s) of packages available.
Version dependencies are for	Selecting working combinations (out of all that ever existed).	Sequencing (ordering) of updates; QA.
Expected use pattern by a downstream	Downstream can combine any declared-good combination.	Use a particular release of the whole system. Mixing-and-matching requires additional QA and remedial work.
Downstreams are protected from breakage by	Pessimistically updating versions and dependencies whenever anything might go wrong.	Whole-release QA.
A substantial deployment will typically contain	Multiple versions of many packages.	A single version of each package, except where there are actual incompatibilities which are too hard to fix.
Package updates are driven by	Top-down: Depending package updates the declared metadata.	Bottom-up: Depended-on package is updated in the repository for the work-in-progress release.

So, while Rust and Debian have systems that look superficially similar, they contain fundamentally different kinds of information. Simply representing the Rust versions directly into Debian doesn t work. What is currently done by the Debian Rust Team is to manually patch the dependency specifications, to relax them. This is very labour-intensive, and there is little automation supporting either decisionmaking or actually applying the resulting changes. What to do Desired end goal To update a Rust package in Debian, that many things depend on, one need simply update that package. Debian s sophisticated build and CI infrastructure will try building all the reverse-dependencies against the new version. Packages that actually fail against the new dependency are flagged as suffering from release-critical problems. Debian Rust developers then update those other packages too. If the problems turn out to be too difficult, it is possible to roll back. If a problem with a depending packages is not resolved in a timely fashion, priority is given to updating core packages, and the depending package falls by the wayside (since it is empirically unmaintainable, given available effort). There is no routine manual patching of dependency metadata (or of anything else). Radical proposal Debian should not precisely follow upstream Rust semver dependency information. Instead, Debian should optimistically try the combinations of packages that we want to have. The resulting breakages will be discovered by automated QA; they will have to be fixed by manual intervention of some kind, but usually, simply updating the depending package will be sufficient. This no longer ensures (unlike the upstream Rust scheme) that the result is expected to build and work if the dependencies are satisfied. But as discussed, we don t really need that property in Debian. More important is the new property we gain: that we are able to mix and match versions that we find work in practice, without a great deal of manual effort. Or to put it another way, in Debian we should do as a Rust upstream maintainer does when they do the regular update dependencies for new semvers task: we should update everything, see what breaks, and fix those. (In theory a Rust upstream package maintainer is supposed to do some additional checks or something. But the practices are not standardised and any checks one does almost never reveal anything untoward, so in practice I think many Rust upstreams just update and see what happens. The Rust upstream community has other mechanisms - often, reactive ones - to deal with any problems. Debian should subscribe to those same information sources, eg RustSec.) Nobbling cargo Somehow, when cargo is run to build Rust things against these Debian packages, cargo s dependency system will have to be overridden so that the version of the package that is actually selected by Debian s package manager is used by cargo without complaint. We probably don t want to change the Rust version numbers of Debian Rust library packages, so this should be done by either presenting cargo with an automatically-massaged Cargo.toml where the dependency version restrictions are relaxed, or by using a modified version of cargo which has special option(s) to relax certain dependencies. Handling breakage Rust packages in Debian should already be provided with autopkgtests so that ci.debian.net will detect build breakages. Build breakages will stop the updated dependency from migrating to the work-in-progress release, Debian testing. To resolve this, and allow forward progress, we will usually upload a new version of the dependency containing an appropriate Breaks, and either file an RC bug against the depending package, or update it. This can be done after the upload of the base package. Thus, resolution of breakage due to incompatibilities will be done collaboratively within the Debian archive, rather than ad-hoc locally. And it can be done without blocking. My proposal prioritises the ability to make progress in the core, over stability and in particular over retaining leaf packages. This is not Debian s usual approach but given the Rust ecosystem s practical attitudes to API design, versioning, etc., I think the instability will be manageable. In practice fixing leaf packages is not usually really that hard, but it s still work and the question is what happens if the work doesn t get done. After all we are always a shortage of effort - and we probably still will be, even if we get rid of the makework clerical work of patching dependency versions everywhere (so that usually no work is needed on depending packages). Exceptions to the one-version rule There will have to be some packages that we need to keep multiple versions of. We won t want to update every depending package manually when this happens. Instead, we ll probably want to set a version number split: rdepends which want version <X will get the old one. Details - a sketch I m going to sketch out some of the details of a scheme I think would work. But I haven t thought this through fully. This is still mostly at the handwaving stage. If my ideas find favour, we ll have to do some detailed review and consider a whole bunch of edge cases I m glossing over. The dependency specification consists of two halves: the depending .deb s Depends (or, for a leaf package, Build-Depends) and the base .deb Version and perhaps Breaks and Provides. Even though libraries vastly outnumber leaf packages, we still want to avoid updating leaf Debian source packages simply to bump dependencies. Dependency encoding proposal Compared to the existing scheme, I suggest we implement the dependency relaxation by changing the depended-on package, rather than the depending one. So we retain roughly the existing semver translation for Depends fields. But we drop all local patching of dependency versions. Into every library source package we insert a new Debian-specific metadata file declaring the earliest version that we uploaded. When we translate a library source package to a .deb, the binary package build adds Provides for every previous version. The effect is that when one updates a base package, the usual behaviour is to simply try to use it to satisfy everything that depends on that base package. The Debian CI will report the build or test failures of all the depending packages which the API changes broke. We will have a choice, then: Breakage handling - update broken depending packages individually If there are only a few packages that are broken, for each broken dependency, we add an appropriate Breaks to the base binary package. (The version field in the Breaks should be chosen narrowly, so that it is possible to resolve it without changing the major version of the dependency, eg by making a minor source change.) When can then do one of the following:

• Update the dependency from upstream, to a version which works with the new base. (Assuming there is one.) This should be the usual response.
• Fix the dependency source code so that builds and works with the new base package. If this wasn t just a backport of an upstream change, we should send our fix upstream. (We should prefer to update the whole package, than to backport an API adjustment.)
• File an RC bug against the dependency (which will eventually trigger autoremoval), or preemptively ask for the Debian release managers to remove the dependency from the work-in-progress release.

Breakage handling - declare new incompatible API in Debian If the API changes are widespread and many dependencies are affected, we should represent this by changing the in-Debian-source-package metadata to arrange for fewer Provides lines to be generated - withdrawing the Provides lines for earlier APIs. Hopefully examination of the upstream changelog will show what the main compat break is, and therefore tell us which Provides we still want to retain. This is like declaring Breaks for all the rdepends. We should do it if many rdepends are affected. Then, for each rdependency, we must choose one of the responses in the bullet points above. In practice this will often be a mass bug filing campaign, or large update campaign. Breakage handling - multiple versions Sometimes there will be a big API rewrite in some package, and we can t easily update all of the rdependencies because the upstream ecosystem is fragmented and the work involved in reconciling it all is too substantial. When this happens we will bite the bullet and include multiple versions of the base package in Debian. The old version will become a new source package with a version number in its name. This is analogous to how key C/C++ libraries are handled. Downsides of this scheme The first obvious downside is that assembling some arbitrary set of Debian Rust library packages, that satisfy the dependencies declared by Debian, is no longer necessarily going to work. The combinations that Debian has tested - Debian releases - will work, though. And at least, any breakage will affect only people building Rust code using Debian-supplied libraries. Another less obvious problem is that because there is no such thing as Build-Breaks (in a Debian binary package), the per-package update scheme may result in no way to declare that a particular library update breaks the build of a particular leaf package. In other words, old source packages might no longer build when exposed to newer versions of their build-dependencies, taken from a newer Debian release. This is a thing that already happens in Debian, with source packages in other languages, though. Semver violation I am proposing that Debian should routinely compile Rust packages against dependencies in violation of the declared semver, and ship the results to Debian s millions of users. This sounds quite alarming! But I think it will not in fact lead to shipping bad binaries, for the following reasons: The Rust community strongly values safety (in a broad sense) in its APIs. An API which is merely capable of insecure (or other seriously bad) use is generally considered to be wrong. For example, such situations are regarded as vulnerabilities by the RustSec project, even if there is no suggestion that any actually-broken caller source code exists, let alone that actually-broken compiled code is likely. The Rust community also values alerting programmers to problems. Nontrivial semantic changes to APIs are typically accompanied not merely by a semver bump, but also by changes to names or types, precisely to ensure that broken combinations of code do not compile. Or to look at it another way, in Debian we would simply be doing what many Rust upstream developers routinely do: bump the versions of their dependencies, and throw it at the wall and hope it sticks. We can mitigate the risks the same way a Rust upstream maintainer would: when updating a package we should of course review the upstream changelog for any gotchas. We should look at RustSec and other upstream ecosystem tracking and authorship information. Difficulties for another day As I said, I see some other issues with Rust in Debian.

• I think the library feature flag encoding scheme is unnecessary. I hope to explain this in a future essay.
• I found Debian s approach to handling the source code for its Rust packages quite awkward; and, it has some troubling properties. Again, I hope to write about this later.
• I get the impression that updating rustc in Debian is a very difficult process. I haven t worked on this myself and I don t feel qualified to have opinions about it. I hope others are thinking about how to make things easier.

Thanks all for your attention!

comments

Review: Crashed, by Adam Tooze

Publisher:	Penguin Books
Copyright:	2018
Printing:	2019
ISBN:	0-525-55880-2
Format:	Kindle
Pages:	615

The histories of the 2008 financial crisis that I have read focus almost exclusively on the United States. They also stop after the bank rescue and TARP or, if they press on into the aftermath, focus on the resulting damage to the US economy and the widespread pain of falling housing prices and foreclosure. Crashed does neither, instead arguing that 2008 was a crisis of European banks as much as American banks. It extends its history to cover the sovereign debt crisis in the eurozone, treating it as a continuation of the same crisis in a different guise. In the process, Tooze makes a compelling argument that one can draw a clear, if wandering, line from the moral revulsion at the propping up of the international banking system to Brexit and Trump. Qualifications first, since they are important for this type of comprehensive and, in places, surprising and counterintuitive history. Adam Tooze is Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Professor of History at Columbia University and the director of its European Institute. His previous books have won multiple awards, and Crashed won the Lionel Gelber Prize for non-fiction on foreign policy. That it won a prize in that topic, rather than history or economics, is a hint at Tooze's chosen lens. The first half of the book is the lead-up and response to the crisis provoked by the collapse in value of securitized US mortgages and leading to the failure of Lehman Brothers, the failure in all but name of AIG, and a massive bank rescue. The financial instruments at the center of the crisis are complex and difficult to understand, and Tooze provides only brief explanation. This therefore may not be the best first book on the crisis; for that, I would still recommend Bethany McClean and Joe Nocera's All the Devils Are Here, although it's hard to beat Michael Lewis's storytelling in The Big Short. Tooze is not interested in dwelling on a blow-by-blow account of the crisis and initial response, and some of his account feels perfunctory. He is instead interested in describing its entangled global sweep. The new detail I took from the first half of Crashed is the depth of involvement of the European banks in what is often portrayed as a US crisis. Tooze goes into more specifics than other accounts on the eurodollar market, run primarily through the City of London, and the vast dollar-denominated liabilities of European banks. When the crisis struck, the breakdown of liquidity markets left those banks with no source of dollar funding to repay dollar-denominated short-term loans. The scale of dollar borrowing by European banks was vast, dwarfing the currency reserves or trade surpluses of their home countries. An estimate from the Bank of International Settlements put the total dollar funding needs for European banks at more than $2 trillion. The institution that saved the European banks was the United States Federal Reserve. This was an act of economic self-protection, not largesse; in the absence of dollar liquidity, the fire sale of dollar assets by European banks in a desperate attempt to cover their loans would have exacerbated the market crash. But it's remarkable in its extent, and in how deeply this contradicts the later public political position that 2008 was an American recession caused by American banks. 52% of the mortgage-backed securities purchased by the Federal Reserve in its quantitative easing policies (popularly known as QE1, QE2, and QE3) were sold by foreign banks. Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse unloaded more securities on the Fed than any American bank by a significant margin. And when that wasn't enough, the Fed went farther and extended swap lines to major national banks, providing them dollar liquidity that they could then pass along to their local institutions. In essence, in Tooze's telling, the US Federal Reserve became the reserve bank for the entire world, preventing a currency crisis by providing dollars to financial systems both foreign and domestic, and it did so with a remarkable lack of scrutiny. Its swap lines avoided public review until 2010, when Bloomberg won a court fight to extract the records. That allowed the European banks that benefited to hide the extent of their exposure.

In Europe, the bullish CEOs of Deutsche Bank and Barclays claimed exceptional status because they avoided taking aid from their national governments. What the Fed data reveal is the hollowness of those boasts. The banks might have avoided state-sponsored recapitalization, but every major bank in the entire world was taking liquidity assistance on a grand scale from its local central bank, and either directly or indirectly by way of the swap lines from the Fed.

The emergency steps taken by Timothy Geithner in the Treasury Department were nearly as dramatic as those of the Federal Reserve. Without regard for borders, and pushing the boundary of their legal authority, they intervened massively in the world (not just the US) economy to save the banking and international finance system. And it worked. One of the benefits of a good history is to turn stories about heroes and villains into more nuanced information about motives and philosophies. I came away from Sheila Bair's account of the crisis furious at Geithner's protection of banks from any meaningful consequences for their greed. Tooze's account, and analysis, agrees with Bair in many respects, but Bair was continuing a personal fight and Tooze has more space to put Geithner into context. That context tells an interesting story about the shape of political economics in the 21st century. Tooze identifies Geithner as an institutionalist. His goal was to keep the system running, and he was acutely aware of what would happen if it failed. He therefore focused on the pragmatic and the practical: the financial system was about to collapse, he did whatever was necessary to keep it working, and that effort was successful. Fairness, fault, and morals were treated as irrelevant. This becomes more obvious when contrasted with the eurozone crisis, which started with a Greek debt crisis in the wake of the recession triggered by the 2008 crisis. Greece is tiny by the standards of the European economy, so at first glance there is no obvious reason why its debt crisis should have perturbed the financial system. Under normal circumstances, its lenders should have been able to absorb such relatively modest losses. But the immediate aftermath of the 2008 crisis was not normal circumstances, particularly in Europe. The United States had moved aggressively to recapitalize its banks using the threat of compensation caps and government review of their decisions. The European Union had not; European countries had done very little, and their banks were still in a fragile state. Worse, the European Central Bank had sent signals that the market interpreted as guaranteeing the safety of all European sovereign debt equally, even though this was explicitly ruled out by the Lisbon Treaty. If Greece defaulted on its debt, not only would that be another shock to already-precarious banks, it would indicate to the market that all European debt was not equal and other countries may also be allowed to default. As the shape of the Greek crisis became clearer, the cost of borrowing for all of the economically weaker European countries began rising towards unsustainable levels. In contrast to the approach taken by the United States government, though, Europe took a moralistic approach to the crisis. Jean-Claude Trichet, then president of the European Central Bank, held the absolute position that defaulting on or renegotiating the Greek debt was unthinkable and would not be permitted, even though there was no realistic possibility that Greece would be able to repay. He also took a conservative hard line on the role of the ECB, arguing that it could not assist in this crisis. (Tooze is absolutely scathing towards Trichet, who comes off in this account as rigidly inflexible, volatile, and completely irrational.) Germany's position, represented by Angela Merkel, was far more realistic: Greece's debt should be renegotiated and the creditors would have to accept losses. This is, in Tooze's account, clearly correct, and indeed is what eventually happened. But the problem with Merkel's position was the potential fallout. The German government was still in denial about the health of its own banks, and political opinion, particularly in Merkel's coalition, was strongly opposed to making German taxpayers responsible for other people's debts. Stopping the progression of a Greek default to a loss of confidence in other European countries would require backstopping European sovereign debt, and Merkel was not willing to support this. Tooze is similarly scathing towards Merkel, but I'm not sure it's warranted by his own account. She seemed, even in his account, boxed in by domestic politics and the tight constraints of the European political structure. Regardless, even after Trichet's term ended and he was replaced by the far more pragmatic Mario Draghi, Germany and Merkel continued to block effective action to relieve Greece's debt burden. As a result, the crisis lurched from inadequate stopgap to inadequate stopgap, forcing crippling austerity, deep depressions, and continued market instability while pretending unsustainable debt would magically become payable through sufficient tax increases and spending cuts. US officials such as Geithner, who put morals and arguably legality aside to do whatever was needed to save the system, were aghast. One takeaway from this is that expansionary austerity is the single worst macroeconomic idea that anyone has ever had.

In the summer of 2012 [the IMF's] staff revisited the forecasts they had made in the spring of 2010 as the eurozone crisis began and discovered that they had systematically underestimated the negative impact of budget cuts. Whereas they had started the crisis believing that the multiplier was on average around 0.5, they now concluded that from 2010 forward it had been in excess of 1. This meant that cutting government spending by 1 euro, as the austerity programs demanded, would reduce economic activity by more than 1 euro. So the share of the state in economic activity actually increased rather than decreased, as the programs presupposed. It was a staggering admission. Bad economics and faulty empirical assumptions had led the IMF to advocate a policy that destroyed the economic prospects for a generation of young people in Southern Europe.

Another takeaway, though, is central to Tooze's point in the final section of the book: the institutionalists in the United States won the war on financial collapse via massive state interventions to support banks and the financial system, a model that Europe grudgingly had to follow when attempting to reject it caused vast suffering while still failing to stabilize the financial system. But both did so via actions that were profoundly and obviously unfair, and only questionably legal. Bankers suffered few consequences for their greed and systematic mismanagement, taking home their normal round of bonuses while millions of people lost their homes and unemployment rates for young men in some European countries exceeded 50%. In Europe, the troika's political pressure against Greece and Italy was profoundly anti-democratic. The financial elite achieved their goal of saving the financial system. It could have failed, that failure would have been catastrophic, and their actions are defensible on pragmatic grounds. But they completely abandoned the moral high ground in the process. The political forces opposed to centrist neoliberalism attempted to step into that moral gap. On the Left, that came in the form of mass protest movements, Occupy Wall Street, Bernie Sanders, and parties such as Syriza in Greece. The Left, broadly, took the moral side of debtors, holding that the primary pain of the crisis should instead be born by the wealthy creditors who were more able to absorb it. The Right by contrast, in the form of the Tea Party movement inside the Republican Party in the United States and the nationalist parties in Europe, broadly blamed debtors for taking on excessive debt and focused their opposition on use of taxpayer dollars to bail out investment banks and other institutions of the rich. Tooze correctly points out that the Right's embrace of racist nationalism and incoherent demagoguery obscures the fact that their criticism of the elite center has real merit and is partly shared by the Left. As Tooze sketches out, the elite centrist consensus held in most of Europe, beating back challenges from both the Left and the Right, although it faltered in the UK, Poland, and Hungary. In the United States, the Democratic Party similarly solidified around neoliberalism and saw off its challenges from the Left. The Republican Party, however, essentially abandoned the centrist position, embracing the Right. That left the Democratic Party as the sole remaining neoliberal institutionalist party, supplemented by a handful of embattled Republican centrists. Wall Street and its money swung to the Democratic Party, but it was deeply unpopular on both the Left and the Right and this shift may have hurt them more than helped. The Democrats, by not abandoning the center, bore the brunt of the residual anger over the bank bailout and subsequent deep recession. Tooze sees in that part of the explanation for Trump's electoral victory over Hilary Clinton. This review is already much too long, and I haven't even mentioned Tooze's clear explanation of the centrality of treasury bonds to world finances, or his discussions of Russian and Ukraine, China, or Brexit, all of which I thought were excellent. This is not only an comprehensive history of both of the crises and international politics of the time period. It is also a thought-provoking look at how drastic of interventions are required to keep the supposed free market working, who is left to suffer after those interventions, and the political consequences of the choice to prioritize the stability of a deeply inequitable and unsafe financial system. At least in the United States, there is now a major political party that is likely to oppose even mundane international financial institutions, let alone another major intervention. The neoliberal center is profoundly weakened. But nothing has been done to untangle the international financial system, and little has been done to reduce its risk. The world will go into the next financial challenge still suffering from a legitimacy crisis. Given the miserly, condescending, and dismissive treatment of the suffering general populace after moving heaven and earth to save the banking system, that legitimacy crisis is arguably justified, but an uncontrolled crash of the financial system is not likely to be any kinder to the average citizen than it is to the investment bankers. Crashed is not the best-written book at a sentence-by-sentence level. Tooze's prose is choppy and a bit awkward, and his paragraphs occasionally wander away from a clear point. But the content is excellent and thought-provoking, filling in large sections of the crisis picture that I had not previously been aware of and making a persuasive argument for its continuing effects on current politics. Recommended if you're not tired of reading about financial crises. Rating: 8 out of 10

Wired magazine has many short documentary films on YouTube, this one about How Photography is Affecting Our Brains is particularly good [1]. Matt Blaze wrote an informative blog post about Faraday cages for phones [2]. It seems that the commercial shielded bags are all pretty good while doing it yourself with aluminium foil may get similar results or may get much worse results with no obvious difference in the quality of the wrapping. Aluminium foil doesn t protect that well and doesn t protect consistently. A metal biscuit tin performed quite well and consistently, so that s a cheap option for reducing signals. Umair Haque wrote an insightful article about the single word that describes most of the problems the world faces right now [3]. Forbes has an informative article about the early days of the Ford company when they doubled wages, it proves that they didn t do so to enable workders to afford cars but to avoid staff turnover (which is expensive) [4]. Also the Ford company had a fascistic approach to employees, controlling what they were allowed to do in their spare time if they wanted the bonus payment. The wages weren t doubled, there was a bonus payment that would double the salary if the employee was eligible for the bonus. One thing that Forbes gets wrong is that they claim that it was only having higher pay than other companies that provided a benefit and that a higher minimum wage wouldn t, the problem with that idea is that a higher minimum wage would discourage people from having multiple jobs and allow more families to not have the mother working (a condition for a man to get the Ford bonus was for his wife to not work). The WSJ has an interesting article about Intel s datacenter for running all the different configurations of CPUs that they have supported over the last 10 years for security tests [5]. My Thinkpad (which is less than 10yo) is vulnerable to one of the SPECTRE family of exploits as Intel hasn t released microcode to fix it, getting fixed microcode out for all the systems from major vendors like Lenovo would be a good idea if they want to improve their security. NPR has an interesting article about the correlation between support for Trump in counties of the US with lack of vaccination and Covid19 deaths [6]. No surprises, but it s good to see the graphs. Cory Doctorow wrote an interesting article on the lack of slack in the current American education system [7]. It s not that bad in Australia but we are unfortunately moving in the American direction. Teen Vogue has an insightful article about the problems with the focus on resilience [8], while resilience is good we should make it a higher priority to avoid putting people in situations where they need to be resiliant than on encouraging resilience.

• [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrPkTs-i75A
• [2] https://www.mattblaze.org/blog/faraday/
• [3] https://tinyurl.com/yy8uxrwo
• [4] https://tinyurl.com/yddbw65b
• [5] https://tinyurl.com/y4sjdapn
• [6] https://tinyurl.com/y6olq6zl
• [7] https://tinyurl.com/yxkxy4q7
• [8] https://tinyurl.com/y228lrbj

Review: The Space Between Worlds, by Micaiah Johnson

Publisher:	Del Rey
Copyright:	2020
ISBN:	0-593-13506-7
Format:	Kindle
Pages:	327

Cara is valuable because, in most places, she's dead. In the world of Earth Zero, as the employees of the Eldridge Institute call it, a scientific genius named Adam Bosch developed the ability to travel between parallel worlds. This ability is not limitless, however. One restriction is that the parallel world has to be very close; large divergences of history render them unreachable. The other restriction is that anyone who attempts to travel to a world in which the local version of themselves is still alive is rejected: physically mangled in ways that result in a very short remaining lifespan. Earth Zero has not found a way to send information between worlds without sending people there physically to collect it. Those people are traversers, and their value lies in how many of their parallel selves have died. Each death in one of the 380 worlds Earth Zero can reach means another world that person can traverse to. They are the transportation system for a network of information-gathering nodes, whose collected contents are mined for stock tips, political cautions, and other information of value. Cara is dead on 372 worlds, and thus provides valuable savings on employee salaries. These related worlds are not so much post-apocalyptic as a continuation of current wealth disparity trends, although it's also clear that the climate has gotten worse. The Eldridge Institute, which controls traversing, is based in Wiley City, a walled, climate-controlled arcology of skyscrapers with a dome that filters out the dangerous sun. Its citizens are rich, with the best social support that money can buy. They are not interested in immigrants, unless they are extremely valuable. Cara is not from Wiley City. She is from Ashtown, the encampment in the desert outside of Wiley City's walls. That's part of the explanation for her death rate; in Ashtown, there are only a few ways to survive, particularly if one is not from the stiflingly religious Rurals, and most of them are dependent on being in the good graces of the local warlord and his Mad-Max-style enforcers. Being a traverser gets Cara out of Ashtown and into Wiley City, but not as a citizen, although that's dangled vaguely as a possible future prize. She's simply an employee, on a work permit, who enjoys the comforts of Wiley City for exactly as long as she's useful. Meanwhile, she juggles the demands of her job, her attraction to her watcher Dell, and her family in Ashtown. She is profoundly, aggressively cynical. Cara is also not precisely who people think she is. The Space Between Worlds pulls off a beautifully elegant combination of two science fiction subgenres: parallel universes and time travel. Both have been part of science fiction for decades, but normally parallel universes are substantially different from each other. Major historical events go differently, Nazis win World War II, Spock has a goatee, etc. Minor deviations are more often the subject of time travel stories, as travelers attempt to tweak the past and influence the future. Johnson instead provides the minor variations and small divergences of time travel stories in a parallel world framework, with no actual time travel involved or possible. The resulting story shows the same ripple effect of small differences, but the future remains unwritten and unconstrained, which avoids the stiflingly closed feeling of most time travel plots. Against that backdrop is set a story of corporate and personal intrigue, but one with a far deeper understanding of class and place than almost all of science fiction. Cara is not from Ashtown in the normal sense of science fiction novels written by comfortably middle-class white authors about protagonists from the wrong side of the tracks, who show their merit and then never look back. Cara is from Ashtown in a way that means she misses the taste of its dirt and understands its people and feels seen there. Wiley City knows very well that she's from Ashtown, and doesn't let her forget it. This type of ambiguous relationship with place and wealth, and deep connection to where one comes from, is so rare in science fiction, and it's beautifully written here. Cara wants to be in Wiley City over the alternative; the potential loss of her job is a real threat. But at the same time she is not at home there, because she is not visible there. Everything is slightly off, she has no one she can really talk to, and her reactions don't quite fit. No one understands her the way that her family in Ashtown does. And yet, by living in Wiley City, she is becoming less at home in Ashtown as well. She is becoming an outsider. It takes about 70 pages for the story in The Space Between Worlds to really get started. Those first 70 pages is very important background information that the rest of the story builds on, but they weren't that engrossing. Once the story kicks into gear, though, it's a tense, complicated story that I had a hard time predicting and an even harder time putting down. It's not perfect (more on that in a moment), but Johnson weaves together Cara's sense of place, her family connections, her sense of self, and her internal moral compass to create a memorable protagonist in a page-turning plot with a satisfying payoff. She uses our ability to look in on several versions of each character to give them additional satisfying heft and depth. Esther, Cara's highly religious sister, is the most delightful character in this book, and that's saying a lot coming from someone who usually doesn't like highly religious characters. I do have some world-building quibbles, and came up with more when I mulled over the book after finishing it, so you may need to strengthen your suspension of disbelief. The passive information gathering via traversing made a lot of sense; the bulk import of raw materials via the industrial hatch makes less sense given the constraints of the world. (Who is loading those materials into the other side? Or are they somehow traversing them directly out of the ground? Wouldn't someone notice?) The plot also partly hinges on a bit of lost technology that is extremely difficult to square with the rest of the setting, and felt like a transparent justification for introducing Mad Max elements into the setting. The quibble I noticed the most may be unavoidable given the setting: alternate worlds with slightly different versions of the same characters creates a potential explosion in cast size, which Johnson deals with by focusing on the cross-world variations of a small number of characters. I like all of those characters, but it does give the story a bit of an incestuous feel. The politics of every world revolve around the same ten people, and no one else seems to matter (or usually even has a name). That said, a small cast is a better problem to have than a confusing cast. Johnson does a great job helping the reader keep all the characters and relationships straight across their alternate world variations. I didn't realize until after I finished the book how difficult that probably was, which is the sign of a job well done. I do also have to complain about how completely dense Cara is when it comes to Dell, but I won't say any more than that to avoid spoilers. There are some things I figured out way before Cara did, though, and that made her behavior rather frustrating. This is an extremely impressive first novel that does some lovely things with genre and even more impressive things with social class and mobility. It's a little rough in places, you have to bear with the first 70 pages, and the ending, while a fitting conclusion to the emotional arc, seemed wildly unbelievable to me given the events of the plot. But it's very much worth reading despite those flaws. Johnson respects her characters and their culture and their world, and it shows. This was one of the best science fiction novels I read in 2021. (Content warning for physical and emotional partner abuse.) Rating: 8 out of 10

Some time back I wrote up a description of my proposed (and implemented) solution for making hibernation work under Linux even within the bounds of the integrity model. It's been a while, so here's an update.

The first is that localities just aren't an option. It turns out that they're optional in the spec, and TPMs are entirely permitted to say they don't support them. The only time they're likely to work is on platforms that support DRTM implementations like TXT. Most consumer hardware doesn't fall into that category, so we don't get to use that solution. Unfortunate, but, well.

The second is that I'd ignored an attack vector. If the kernel is configured to restrict access to PCR 23, then yes, an attacker is never able to modify PCR 23 to be in the same state it would be if hibernation were occurring and the key certification data will fail to validate. Unfortunately, an attacker could simply boot into an older kernel that didn't implement the PCR 23 restriction, and could fake things up there (yes, this is getting a bit convoluted, but the entire point here is to make this impossible rather than just awkward). Once PCR 23 was in the correct state, they would then be able to write out a new swap image, boot into a new kernel that supported the secure hibernation solution, and have that resume successfully in the (incorrect) belief that the image was written out in a secure environment.

This felt like an awkward problem to fix. We need to be able to distinguish between the kernel having modified the PCRs and userland having modified the PCRs, and we need to be able to do this without modifying any kernels that have already been released[1]. The normal approach to determining whether an event occurred in a specific phase of the boot process is to "cap" the PCR - extend it with a known value that indicates a transition between stages of the boot process. Any events that occur before the cap event must have occurred in the previous stage of boot, and since the final PCR value depends on the order of measurements and not just the contents of those measurements, if a PCR is capped before userland runs, userland can't fake the same PCR value afterwards. If Linux capped a PCR before userland started running, we'd be able to place a measurement there before the cap occurred and then prove that that extension occurred before userland had the opportunity to interfere. We could simply place a statement that the kernel supported the PCR 23 restrictions there, and we'd be fine.

Unfortunately Linux doesn't currently do this, and adding support for doing so doesn't fix the problem - if an attacker boots a kernel that doesn't cap a PCR, they can just cap it themselves from userland. So, we're faced with the same problem: booting an older kernel allows the system to be placed in an identical state to the current kernel, and a fake hibernation image can be written out. Solving this required a PCR that was being modified after kernel code was running, but before userland was started, even with existing kernels.

Thankfully, there is one! PCR 5 is defined as containing measurements related to boot management configuration and data. One of the measurements it contains is the result of the UEFI ExitBootServices() call. ExitBootServices() is called at the transition from the UEFI boot environment to the running OS, and the kernel contains code that executes before it. So, if we measure an assertion regarding whether or not we support restricted access to PCR 23 into PCR 5 before we call ExitBootServices(), this will prevent userspace from spoofing us (because userspace will only be able to extend PCR 5 after the firmware extended PCR 5 in response to ExitBootServices() being called). Obviously this depends on the firmware actually performing the PCR 5 extension when ExitBootServices() is called, but if firmware's out of spec then I don't think there's any real expectation of it being secure enough for any of this to buy you anything anyway.

My current tree is here, but there's a couple of things I want to do before submitting it, including ensuring that the key material is wiped from RAM after use (otherwise it could potentially be scraped out and used to generate another image afterwards) and, uh, actually making sure this works (I no longer have the machine I was previously using for testing, and switching my other dev machine over to TPM 2 firmware is proving troublesome, so I need to pull another machine out of the stack and reimage it).

[1] The linear nature of time makes feature development much more frustrating

comments

Just as I did for 2020, I won't publically disclose exactly how many books I read in 2021, but they evidently provoked enough thoughts that felt it worth splitting my yearly writeup into separate posts. I will reveal, however, that I got through more books than the previous year, and, like before, I enjoyed the books I read this year even more in comparison as well. How much of this is due to refining my own preferences over time, and how much can be ascribed to feeling less pressure to read particular books? It s impossible to say, and the question is complicated further by the fact I found many of the classics I read well worth of their entry into the dreaded canon. But enough of the throat-clearing. In today's post I'll be looking at my favourite books filed under memoir and biography, in no particular order. Books that just missed the cut here include: Bernard Crick's celebrated 1980 biography of George Orwell, if nothing else because it was a pleasure to read; Hilary Mantel's exhilaratingly bitter early memoir, Giving up the Ghost (2003); and Patricia Lockwood's hilarious Priestdaddy (2017). I also had a soft spot for Tim Kreider's We Learn Nothing (2012) as well, despite not knowing anything about the author in advance, likely a sign of good writing. The strangest book in this category I read was definitely Michelle Zauner's Crying in H Mart. Based on a highly-recommended 2018 essay in the New Yorker, its rich broth of genuine yearning for a departed mother made my eyebrows raise numerous times when I encountered inadvertent extra details about Zauner's relationships.

Beethoven: A Life in Nine Pieces (2020) Laura Tunbridge Whilst it might immediately present itself as a clickbait conceit, organising an overarching narrative around just nine compositions by Beethoven turns out to be an elegant way of saying something fresh about this grizzled old bear. Some of Beethoven's most famous compositions are naturally included in the nine (eg. the Eroica and the Hammerklavier piano sonata), but the book raises itself above conventional Beethoven fare when it highlights, for instance, his Septet, Op. 20, an early work that is virtually nobody's favourite Beethoven piece today. The insight here is that it was widely popular in its time, played again and again around Vienna for the rest of his life. No doubt many contemporary authors can relate to this inability to escape being artistically haunted by an earlier runaway success. The easiest way to say something interesting about Beethoven in the twenty-first century is to talk about the myth of Beethoven instead. Or, as Tunbridge implies, perhaps that should really be 'Beethoven' in leaden quotation marks, given so much about what we think we know about the man is a quasi-fictional construction. Take Anton Schindler, Beethoven's first biographer and occasional amanuensis, who destroyed and fabricated details about Beethoven's life, casting himself in a favourable light and exaggerating his influence with the composer. Only a few decades later, the idea of a 'heroic' German was to be politically useful as well; the Anglosphere often need reminding that Germany did not exist as a nation-state prior to 1871, so it should be unsurprising to us that the late nineteenth-century saw a determined attempt to create a uniquely 'German' culture ex nihilo. (And the less we say about Immortal Beloved the better, even though I treasure that film.) Nevertheless, Tunbridge cuts through Beethoven's substantial legacy using surgical precision that not only avoids feeling like it is settling a score, but it also does so in a way that is unlikely to completely alienate anyone emotionally dedicated to some already-established idea of the man to bring forth the tediously predictable sentiment that Beethoven has 'gone woke'. With Alex Ross on the cult of Wagner, it seems that books about the 'myth of X' are somewhat in vogue right now. And this pattern within classical music might fit into some broader trend of deconstruction in popular non-fiction too, especially when we consider the numerous contemporary books on the long hangover of the Civil Rights era (Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility, etc.), the multifarious ghosts of Empire (Akala's Natives, Sathnam Sanghera's Empireland, etc.) or even the 'transmogrification' of George Orwell into myth. But regardless of its place in some wider canon, A Life in Nine Pieces is beautifully printed in hardback form (worth acquiring for that very reason alone), and it is one of the rare good books about classical music that can be recommended to both the connoisseur and the layperson alike.

Sea State (2021) Tabitha Lasley In her mid-30s and jerking herself out of a terrible relationship, Tabitha Lasley left London and put all her savings into a six-month lease on a flat within a questionable neighbourhood in Aberdeen, Scotland. She left to make good on a lukewarm idea for a book about oil rigs and the kinds of men who work on them: I wanted to see what men were like with no women around, she claims. The result is Sea State, a forthright examination of the life of North Sea oil riggers, and an unsparing portrayal of loneliness, masculinity, female desire and the decline of industry in Britain. (It might almost be said that Sea State is an update of a sort to George Orwell's visit to the mines in the North of England.) As bracing as the North Sea air, Sea State spoke to me on multiple levels but I found it additionally interesting to compare and contrast with Julian Barnes' The Man with Red Coat (see below). Women writers are rarely thought to be using fiction for higher purposes: it is assumed that, unlike men, whatever women commit to paper is confessional without any hint of artfulness. Indeed, it seems to me that the reaction against the decades-old genre of autofiction only really took hold when it became the domain of millennial women. (By contrast, as a 75-year-old male writer with a firmly established reputation in the literary establishment, Julian Barnes is allowed wide latitude in what he does with his sources and his writing can be imbued with supremely confident airs as a result.) Furthermore, women are rarely allowed metaphor or exaggeration for dramatic effect, and they certainly aren t permitted to emphasise darker parts in order to explore them... hence some of the transgressive gratification of reading Sea State. Sea State is admittedly not a work of autofiction, but the sense that you are reading about an author writing a book is pleasantly unavoidable throughout. It frequently returns to the topic of oil workers who live multiple lives, and Lasley admits to living two lives herself: she may be in love but she's also on assignment, and a lot of the pleasure in this candid and remarkably accessible book lies in the way these states become slowly inseparable.

Twilight of Democracy (2020) Anne Applebaum For the uninitiated, Anne Applebaum is a staff writer for The Atlantic magazine who won a Pulitzer-prize for her 2004 book on the Soviet Gulag system. Her latest book, however, Twilight of Democracy is part memoir and part political analysis and discusses the democratic decline and the rise of right-wing populism. This, according to Applebaum, displays distinctly authoritarian tendencies, and who am I to disagree? Applebaum does this through three main case studies (Poland, the United Kingdom and the United States), but the book also touches on Hungary as well. The strongest feature of this engaging book is that Appelbaum's analysis focuses on the intellectual classes and how they provide significant justification for a descent into authoritarianism. This is always an important point to be remembered, especially as much of the folk understanding of the rise of authoritarian regimes tends to place exaggerated responsibility on the ordinary and everyday citizen: the blame placed on the working-class in the Weimar Republic or the scorn heaped upon 'white trash' of the contemporary Rust Belt, for example. Applebaum is uniquely poised to discuss these intellectuals because, well, she actually knows a lot of them personally. Or at least, she used to know them. Indeed, the narrative of the book revolves around two parties she hosted, both in the same house in northwest Poland. The first party, on 31 December 1999, was attended by friends from around the Western world, but most of the guests were Poles from the broad anti-communist alliance. They all agreed about democracy, the rule of law and the route to prosperity whilst toasting in the new millennium. (I found it amusing to realise that War and Peace also starts with a party.) But nearly two decades later, many of the attendees have ended up as supporters of the problematic 'Law and Justice' party which currently governs the country. Applebaum would now cross the road to avoid them, and they would do the same to her, let alone behave themselves at a cordial reception. The result of this autobiographical detail is that by personalising the argument, Applebaum avoids the trap of making too much of high-minded abstract argument for 'democracy', and additionally makes her book compellingly spicy too. Yet the strongest part of this book is also its weakest. By individualising the argument, it often feels that Applebaum is settling a number of personal scores. She might be very well justified in doing this, but at times it feels like the reader has walked in halfway through some personal argument and is being asked to judge who is in the right. Furthermore, Applebaum's account of contemporary British politics sometimes deviates into the cartoonish: nothing was egregiously incorrect in any of her summations, but her explanation of the Brexit referendum result didn't read as completely sound. Nevertheless, this lively and entertaining book that can be read with profit, even if you disagree with significant portions of it, and its highly-personal approach makes it a refreshing change from similar contemporary political analysis (eg. David Runciman's How Democracy Ends) which reaches for that more 'objective' line.

The Man in the Red Coat (2019) Julian Barnes As rich as the eponymous red coat that adorns his cover, Julian Barnes quasi-biography of French gynaecologist Samuel-Jean Pozzi (1846 1918) is at once illuminating, perplexing and downright hilarious. Yet even that short description is rather misleading, for this book evades classification all manner number of ways. For instance, it is unclear that, with the biographer's narrative voice so obviously manifest, it is even a biography in the useful sense of the word. After all, doesn't the implied pact between author and reader require the biographer to at least pretend that they are hiding from the reader? Perhaps this is just what happens when an author of very fine fiction turns his hand to non-fiction history, and, if so, it represents a deeper incursion into enemy territory after his 1984 metafictional Flaubert's Parrot. Indeed, upon encountering an intriguing mystery in Pozzi's life crying out for a solution, Barnes baldly turns to the reader, winks and states: These matters could, of course, be solved in a novel. Well, quite. Perhaps Barnes' broader point is that, given that's impossible for the author to completely melt into air, why not simply put down your cards and have a bit of fun whilst you're at it? If there's any biography that makes the case for a rambling and lightly polemical treatment, then it is this one. Speaking of having fun, however, two qualities you do not expect in a typical biography is simply how witty they can be, as well as it having something of the whiff of the thriller about it. A bullet might be mentioned in an early chapter, but given the name and history of Monsieur Pozzi is not widely known, one is unlikely to learn how he lived his final years until the closing chapters. (Or what happened to that turtle.) Humour is primarily incorporated into the book in two main ways: first, by explicitly citing the various wits of the day ( What is a vice? Merely a taste you don t share. etc.), but perhaps more powerful is the gentle ironies, bon mots and observations in Barnes' entirely unflappable prose style, along with the satire implicit in him writing this moreish pseudo-biography to begin with. The opening page, with its steadfast refusal to even choose where to begin, is somewhat characteristic of Barnes' method, so if you don't enjoy the first few pages then you are unlikely to like the rest. (Indeed, the whole enterprise may be something of an acquired taste. Like Campari.) For me, though, I was left wryly grinning and often couldn't wait to turn the page. Indeed, at times it reminded me of a being at a dinner party with an extremely charming guest at the very peak of his form as a wit and raconteur, delighting the party with his rambling yet well-informed discursive on his topic de jour. A significant book, and a book of significance.

Recently I purchased a small telescope to look at solar spots. When choosing a mount, I checked whether it can be controlled with OSS. In this context INDI is mentioned everywhere and my desired mount was supported. indi and kstars are already part of Debian, so apt install , selecting my mount, . oh, wait, the menu shows it, but I can not select it. Ok, that was the time when I learned about the difference of indi and indi-3rdparty. The indi package just contains a few drivers and others are available from a different repository. This split has been done either due to different release cycles of the driver, a different OSS license of it, or just due to binary blobs without source being part of some drivers. Fine, there are already packages of the 3rdparty-repository available from an Ubuntu PPA, so it should be no problem to add them do Debian as well. Some manufacturers freely distribute at least the specification of their API so that others are able to write the corresponding software. Some manufacturers even write their own driver. Examples are:

• Skywatcher (mounts who can be controlled by the Skywatcher Protocol)
• Shelyak to control some spectrographs
• Radio Astronomy Supplies SpectraCyber hydrogen line spectrometer
• Vixen, for controlling Vixen Starbook and Vixen Starbook Ten
• Starlight Express, SX CCDs, SX wheel and SX Active Optics

A minor part actually does not have binary blobs but distributes the sources of their software. Unfortunately they have licenses that are not compatible with DFSG and those packages still need to go to non-free. Examples are:

• Finger Lakes Instrumentation (FLI), L.L.C.
• Lunatico Astronomia
• Astrojolo
• Astromechanics

But there also seem to exist lots of manufacturers of astronomically accessories, especially cameras, that just distribute some binary blobs to talk to their hardware. This is sad, but at the moment it is just the way it is and such package need to go to non-free. Luckily their blobs are accompanied with corresponding licenses. At least those manufacturers understand how software licenses work and packaging their SDK is just straight forward. Examples are:

• SBIG Astronomical Instruments
• Moravian Instruments Inc.
• Player One Astronomy

However, when looking at the license information of some Ubuntu packages, several of them were distributed under a CC license. This is not a common license for software, so I wanted to get a confirmation whether these information are correct. Unfortunately most of such manufacturers don t want to disclose their licenses. For whatever reason they distribute their tarballs without any hint and emails to their support channels are just ignored. Examples of such bad behaviour are:

• Altaircam
• QSI (was bought by Atik)
• Atik
• Touptek
• QHY

However the best answer comes from the Levenhuk support. My question about the license of their SDK was answered by:

I am afraid we cannot disclose any further information except the software file that is available on our website.

So strictly speaking nobody is allowed to use their software. I wonder whether such competence also becomes visible in their products. I will never really know as there are more than enough OSS friendly manufacturers available. Anyway, most of the indi-3rdparty drivers are now available and I got lots of suggestions about hardware I need to buy in the future :-).

Hello Everyone! Three weeks into my internship and it s been great so far with Awesome Mentors. I am currently learning a new Language which is Ruby and this is the perfect time to remind myself that everyone struggles! I struggled a bit getting farmiliar with the codebase and pushing my first merge request during the internship. I won t say i have a perfect understanding of how everything works, but i am learning.

What is Debci? Debci stands for Debian Continous Integration before i move on, what is continous integration? according to Atlassian Continuous integration (CI) is the practice of automating the integration of code changes from multiple contributors into a single software project. It s a primary DevOps best practice, allowing developers to frequently merge code changes into a central repository where builds and tests then run. Automated tools are used to assert the new code s correctness before integration. From the official documentation; The Debian continuous integration (debci) is an automated system that coordinates the execution of automated tests against packages in the Debian system. Debci exist to make sure packages work currently after an update, How it does this is by testing all of the packages that have tests written in them to make sure it works and nothing is broken. It has a UI for developers to see if the test passes or not.

Progress This week; I have learnt how to write automated test and Squashing multiple commits into one single commit.

Review: Shattered Pillars, by Elizabeth Bear

Series:	Eternal Sky #2
Publisher:	Tor
Copyright:	March 2013
ISBN:	0-7653-2755-4
Format:	Hardcover
Pages:	333

Shattered Pillars is the second book in the Eternal Sky series, which begins with Range of Ghosts. You should read them in order, and ideally close together, since they (along with the next book) form a single continuous story. I made the horrible mistake of reading the first book of an Elizabeth Bear series and then letting four years go by before reading the second one. Bear's trademark style is to underexplain things to the point that it can be hard to follow the plot when you remember it, let alone after more than sufficient time to forget even the general shape of the plot. I therefore spent most of this book (and a bit of Internet searching) trying to dig up pieces of my memory and reconstruct the story. Learn from my error and read the trilogy as one novel if you're going to read it. Please, authors and publishers, put a short plot synopsis at the start of series books. No, your hints about what happened previously that you weave into the first two chapters are not as good as a one-page plot synopsis. No, I don't want to have to re-read the first book; do you have any idea how many books I own but haven't read? No, the Internet doesn't provide plot synopses for every book. Give me a couple of paragraphs and help me enjoy your fiction! Argh. Possible spoiler warnings for the first book are in order because I don't remember the first book well enough to remember what plot details might be a spoiler. As Shattered Pillars opens, Temur, Samarkar, and their companions have reached the western city of Asitaneh, seeking help from Temur's grandfather to rescue Edene from the Nameless. This will require breaching the Nameless fortress of Ala-Din. That, in turn, will entangle Temur and Samarkar in the politics of the western caliphate, where al-Sepehr of the Nameless is also meddling. Far to the east, from where Samarkar came, a deadly plague breaks out in the city of Tsarepheth, one that follows an eerily reliable progression and is even more sinister than it may first appear. Al-Sepehr's plans to sow chaos and war using ancient evil magic and bend the results to his favor continue apace. But one of the chess pieces he thought he controlled has partly escaped his grasp. Behind all of this lurks the powers of Erem and its scorching, blinding, multi-sunned sky. Al-Sepehr believes he understands those powers well enough to use them. He may be wrong. This is entirely the middle book of a trilogy, in that essentially nothing is resolved here. All the pieces in motion at the start of this book are still in motion at the end of this book. We learn a lot more about the characters, get some tantalizing and obscure glances at Erem, and end the book with a firmer idea of the potential sides and powers in play, but there is barely any plot resolution and no proper intermediate climax. This is a book to read as part of a series, not on its own. That said, I enjoyed this book considerably more than I would have expected given how little is resolved. Bear's writing is vivid and engrossing and made me feel like I was present in this world even when nothing apparently significant was happening. And, as usual, her world-building is excellent if you like puzzles, stray hints, and complicated, multi-faceted mythology. This is a world in which the sky literally changes depending on which magical or mythological system reigns supreme in a given area, which in the Erem sections give it a science fiction flavor. If someone told me Bear could merge Silk Road historical fantasy with some of the feel of planetary romance (but far more sophisticated writing), I would have been dubious, but it works. Perhaps the best thing about this book is that all of the characters feel like adults. They make complex, nuanced decisions in pursuit of their goals, thoughtfully adjust to events, rarely make obviously stupid decisions, and generally act like the intelligent and experienced people that they are. This is refreshing in epic fantasy, where the plot tends to steamroll the characters and where often there's a young chosen one at the center of the plot whose courage and raw power overcomes repeated emotional stupidity. Shattered Pillars is careful, precise, and understated where epic fantasy is often brash, reckless, and over-explained. That plus the subtle and deep world-building makes this world feel older and more complex than most series of this sort. There's also a magical horse, who is delightfully uninterested in revealing anything about where it came from or why it's magical, and who was probably my favorite character of the book. Hrahima, the giant tiger-woman, is a close second. I was intrigued to learn more about her complicated relationship with her entirely separate mythology, and hope there's more about that the third book. The villain is still hissable, but a bit less blatantly so on camera. It helps that the scenes from the villains' perspective primarily focus on his more interesting servants. One of the problems with this book, and I think one of the reasons why it feels so transitional and intermediate, is that there are a lot of viewpoint characters and a lot of scene-switching. We're kept up-to-date with four separate threads of events, generally with more than one viewpoint character in each of those threads, and at times (particularly with the wizards of Tsarepheth) I had trouble keeping all the supporting characters straight. Hopefully the third book will quickly merge plot lines and bring some of this complexity together. I wish I'd read this more closely to Range of Ghosts. Either that or a plot synopsis would have helped me enjoy it more. But this is solid epic fantasy by one of SFF's better writers, and now I'm invested in the series again. Some unfortunate logistics are currently between me and the third book, but it won't be four years before I finish the series. Followed by Steles of the Sky. Rating: 7 out of 10

A new maintenance RcppSMC release 0.2.6 arrived at CRAN yesterday. It chiefly updates the code to comply with g++-11 which default to C++17 which brings us std::data(). And if one is not careful, as we weren t in three files, this can clash with other uses of data as I tweeted a good week ago. Otherwise some JSS URLs now sport the preferred shorter doi form. RcppSMC provides Rcpp-based bindings to R for the Sequential Monte Carlo Template Classes (SMCTC) by Adam Johansen described in his JSS article. Sequential Monte Carlo is also referred to as Particle Filter in some contexts. The package features the Google Summer of Code work by Leah South in 2017, and by Ilya Zarubin in 2021. This release is summarized below.

Changes in RcppSMC version 0.2.6 (2021-12-17)

• Updated URLs to JSS for the new DOI scheme upon their request
• Adjusted three source files for C++17 compilation under g++-11

Courtesy of my CRANberries, there is a diffstat report for this release. More information is on the RcppSMC page. Issues and bugreports should go to the GitHub issue tracker. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

This year I finally bought an e-reader: a "Kobo Libra H2O": a 7" 300ppi screen with an adjustable colour temperature front light, waterproof, physical buttons on a "margin"/spine which pushes the case dimensions up to 8", which is sadly a little too big for most jeans pockets. In fact this is the second time I've bought one. Sarah and I bought a pair of Amazon Kindle Paperwhite (2^nd generation) readers as Honeymoon gifts for each other in 2013. Sarah took to hers, but after giving mine a try and reading a couple of books on it I ended up giving it to my Father-in-law. The main problem I had with it was the colour temperature of the backlight: it was too blue and "clinical". It's interesting to me to realise how the environment that I read in can become indelibly linked to the memory of that book. One book in particular that I read on the Kindle was James Smythe's "The Machine", a modern twist on a classic horror story. This was perfectly complemented by the somewhat pallid, sick colour of the backlight, especially on its lowest brightness settings. It didn't go so well with other stories. I got on much better with the Libra H2O. For me, e-books and e-reading has not replaced traditional paper books, but complemented them, giving me an opportunity to read in contexts and situations where I couldn't manage with a real book (such as in the pitch black, lying on my back with a toddler on my chest). I feel that being able to read more often thanks to the e-reader has spurred me on to read even paper books more frequently as well. Unfortunately the screen broke, about 10 months after I bought it! After a bit of soul-searching on what to do about replacing it, and briefly considering the latest Amazon Paperwhite (which now has a 300ppi display and adjustable-colour temperature front-light). This looks like a very nice e-reader: no physical buttons which is a bit of a shame but narrower without the margin/spine of the Kobo, so possibly more pocket-friendly. On the other hand, I really felt that I wanted to avoid giving Amazon the money, for a whole variety of reasons. So I instead settled on the "Kobo Libra 2", which is a slight refresh of the Libra H2O, but almost identical. I'm going to pair it with a nice cover for when its not in use and hopefully it will last longer than its predecessor. My current favourite feature on the Libra 2, that I don't remember on the H2O and I'm fairly sure doesn't exist on Kindles is it supports a "night mode", which is effectively a reverse video, white-on-black mode. This is fantastic for keeping the light levels down at night. I was already using the backlight at about 2% brightness and occasionally found even that too bright.

Armadillo is a powerful and expressive C++ template library for linear algebra aiming towards a good balance between speed and ease of use with a syntax deliberately close to a Matlab. RcppArmadillo integrates this library with the R environment and language and is widely used by (currently) 937 other packages on CRAN, and downloaded over 22 million times (per the partial logs from the cloud mirrors of CRAN). This release brings another bug fix release 10.7.5 by Conrad in the long-term support 10.7.* series we started with 0.10.7.0 on September 30. As the bug fixes can come a little quicker than the desired monthly cadence CRAN aims for, we skipped a few of those release for CRAN only but of course still provide them via the Rcpp drat repo. The full set of changes (since the last CRAN release 0.10.7.3.0) follows. It includes the nice fixes to the fields type mentioned right after the last release.

Changes in RcppArmadillo version 0.10.7.5.0 (2021-12-16)

• Upgraded to Armadillo release 10.7.5
  • fix aliasing bug in diagmat()
  • fix detection of 2x2 triangular matrices

Changes in RcppArmadillo version 0.10.7.4.0 (2021-11-23)

• Upgraded to Armadillo release 10.7.4
  • faster handling of diagonal matrices by inv_sympd(), pinv(), rank()
  • more robust detection of incorrect data format by .load()
• Correct dimensions setting in import/export of arma::field types, protected by #define (Jonathan Berrisch in #352 fixing #351)
• Add unit tests for fields both with and without new #define (Dirk)

Courtesy of my CRANberries, there is a diffstat report relative to previous release. More detailed information is on the RcppArmadillo page. Questions, comments etc should go to the rcpp-devel mailing list off the R-Forge page. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

A new release 0.4.18 of RProtoBuf arrived on CRAN earlier today. RProtoBuf provides R with bindings for the Google Protocol Buffers ( ProtoBuf ) data encoding and serialization library used and released by Google, and deployed very widely in numerous projects as a language and operating-system agnostic protocol. This release, the first since March of last year, contains two contributed pull requests improving or extending the package, some internal maintance updating the CI setup as well as retiring an old-yet-unused stub interface for RPC, as well as an update for UCRT builds on Windows. The following section from the NEWS.Rd file has more details.

Changes in RProtoBuf version 0.4.18 (2021-12-15)

• Support string_view in FindMethodByName() (Adam Cozzette in #72).
• CI use was updated first at Travis, later at GitHub and now uses r-ci (Dirk in #74 and (parts of) #76).
• The (to the best of our knowledge) unused minimal RPC mechanism has been removed, retiring one method and one class as well as the import of the RCurl package (Dirk in #76).
• The toJSON() method supports two (upstream) formatting toggles (Vitali Spinu in #79 with minor edit by Dirk).
• Windows UCRT builds are now supported (Jeroen in #81, Dirk and Tomas Kalibera in #82).

Thanks to my CRANberries, there is a diff to the previous release. The RProtoBuf page has copies of the (older) package vignette, the quick overview vignette, and the pre-print of our JSS paper. Questions, comments etc should go to the GitHub issue tracker off the GitHub repo. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

Boost is a very large and comprehensive set of (peer-reviewed) libraries for the C++ programming language, containing well over 100 individual libraries. The BH package provides a sizeable subset of header-only libraries for (easier, no linking required) use by R. It is fairly widely used: the (partial) CRAN mirror logs (aggregated from the cloud mirrors) show over 28 million package downloads. Version 1.78.0 of Boost was released in a few days ago on their schedule with April, August and December releases. We follow these releases at a lower (annual) cadence, and BH 1.78.0-0 catches up to Boost 1.78 from the 1.75 version packaged last winter. Three reverse-depends checks revealed only minors needs for changes (after I corrected a fat-finger typo, whoops) in a handful of packages whose maintainers I contacted via PRs or emails. With that, CRAN permitted the upload yesterday. My thanks once again to the maintainers of these packages for helping it along promptly, and of course to the CRAN team. This release adds the new header-only library Boost Lambda2 offering simple but functional lambda functions (for C++14 and later), as well as Boost Process to manage system processes.

Changes in version 1.78.0-0 (2020-12-14)

• Incremental updates to README.md and CI setup
• Upgraded to Boost 1.78.0 (#82 closing #80)
• Added process (closing #78)
• Added lambda2 (closing #81)

Via my CRANberries, there is a diffstat report relative to the previous release. Comments and suggestions about BH are welcome via the issue tracker at the GitHub repo. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

Boost is a very large and comprehensive set of (peer-reviewed) libraries for the C++ programming language, containing well over 100 individual libraries. The BH package provides a sizeable subset of header-only libraries for (easier, no linking required) use by R. It is fairly widely used: the (partial) CRAN mirror logs (aggregated from the cloud mirrors) show over 28 million package downloads. Version 1.78.0 of Boost was released in a few days ago on their schedule with April, August and December releases. We follow these releases at a lower (annual) cadence, and BH 1.78.0-0 catches up to Boost 1.78 from the 1.75 version packaged last winter. Three reverse-depends checks revealed only minors needs for changes (after I corrected a fat-finger typo, whoops) in a handful of packages whose maintainers I contacted via PRs or emails. With that, CRAN permitted the upload yesterday. My thanks once again to the maintainers of these packages for helping it along promptly, and of course to the CRAN team. This release adds the new header-only library Boost Lambda2 offering simple but functional lambda functions (for C++14 and later), as well as Boost Process to manage system processes.

Changes in version 1.78.0-0 (2020-12-14)

• Incremental updates to README.md and CI setup
• Upgraded to Boost 1.78.0 (#82 closing #80)
• Added process (closing #78)
• Added lambda2 (closing #81)

Via my CRANberries, there is a diffstat report relative to the previous release. Comments and suggestions about BH are welcome via the issue tracker at the GitHub repo. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

Another (minor) nanotime release, now at version 0.3.5, just arrived at CRAN. It follows the updates RDieHarder 0.2.3 and RcppCCTZ 0.2.10 earlier today in bringing a patch kindly prepared by Tomas Kalibera for the upcoming (and very useful) UCRT changes for Windows involving small build changes for the updated Windows toolchain. nanotime relies on the RcppCCTZ package for (efficient) high(er) resolution time parsing and formatting up to nanosecond resolution, and the bit64 package for the actual integer64 arithmetic. Initially implemented using the S3 system, it has benefitted greatly from a rigorous refactoring by Leonardo who not only rejigged nanotime internals in S4 but also added new S4 types for periods, intervals and durations. The NEWS snippet adds more details.

Changes in version 0.3.5 (2021-12-14)

• Applied patch by Tomas Kalibera for Windows UCRT under the upcoming R 4.2.0 expected for April.

Thanks to my CRANberries there is also a diff to the previous version. More details and examples are at the nanotime page; code, issue tickets etc at the GitHub repository. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

A new release 0.2.10 of RcppCCTZ is now on CRAN. RcppCCTZ uses Rcpp to bring CCTZ to R. CCTZ is a C++ library for translating between absolute and civil times using the rules of a time zone. In fact, it is two libraries. One for dealing with civil time: human-readable dates and times, and one for converting between between absolute and civil times via time zones. And while CCTZ is made by Google(rs), it is not an official Google product. The RcppCCTZ page has a few usage examples and details. This package was the first CRAN package to use CCTZ; by now four others packages include its sources too. Not ideal, but beyond our control. This version switches to r-ci, and just like RDieHarder includes a patch kindly prepared by Tomas Kalibera for the upcoming (and very useful) UCRT changes for Windows involving small build changes for the updated Windows toolchain.

Changes in version 0.2.10 (2021-12-14)

• Switch CI use to r-ci
• Applied patch by Tomas Kalibera for Windows UCRT under the upcoming R 4.2.0 expected for April.

We also have a diff to the previous version thanks to my CRANberries. More details are at the RcppCCTZ page; code, issue tickets etc at the GitHub repository. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

An new version 0.2.3 of the random-number generator tester RDieHarder (based on the DieHarder suite developed / maintained by Robert Brown with contributions by David Bauer and myself) is now on CRAN. This release comes only about one and half months after the previous release 0.2.2 and is once again related to R and CRAN changes. The upcoming (and very useful) UCRT changes for Windows involve small build changes for the updated Windows toolchain so this release includes a patch kindly prepared by Tomas Kalibera. And because compilers get cleverer and cleverer over time, I also address a warning and error found by the newest gcc in what is otherwise unchanged and years old C code In addition, two other warnings were fixed right after the previous release. Thanks to CRANberries, you can also look at the most recent diff. If you like this or other open-source work I do, you can now sponsor me at GitHub.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.