Elan Ruusamäe pisze: > On Wednesday 09 April 2008 20:33, Tomasz Mateja wrote: >> Translated: >> >> I've tried to check what hurts AC: >> 1. During the instalation from bootdisk-net, basic instalation, the >> SysVinit package wasn't installed - result nonbooting system, when >> manually installed - it works > recommended way of installing is chroot install, and there it is you who says > what to install. the "installer" might had worked for Ra, it was put to Ac > only because there doesn't exist anything else. And that was one of WORKING methods while freezing AC - so while it is stable it should work.
> and what did it install afterall? as rc-scripts which is needed for quite > everything is dependencies: > $ ac-requires SysVinit > rc-scripts-0.4.1.18-1.i686 Try yourself in vmware or virtualbox >> 2. Upgrade AC, it fails when upgrading rpm with the message of missing >> lzma, when manully install the lzma package it installs but fails on >> rebuilding rpm database. > upgrade to ac from what? Upgrade AC to AC+updates with poldek> upgrade * (most users do that) > > 'poldek --upgrade-dist' works fine here (having only ac,ac-updates trees > enabled) >> 3. after reboot: >> locale: Cannot set LC_CTYPE to default locale: No such file or directory >> locale: Cannot set LC_MESSAGES to default locale: No such file or directory >> locale: Cannot set LC_ALL to default locale: No such file or directory >> stty: invalid argument `-utf8' >> Try `stty --help' for more information. > missing context. what did issue this message? Dunno, what context do you want?, simply try basic installation from bootdisk-net and upgrade after that (not editing nor configuring anything) >> 4. By the way who [EMAIL PROTECTED]@^%&*(&^%$% put kernel-2.6.22 to AC????? > > it is in ac-ready, using ac-test or ac-ready is your own risk, as quite some > developers can send pkgs there, so it's contents are not ftp admin > decision/control. > > and instead of living out your feelings, report bugs what is wrong with > 2.6.22 > kernel (in lists or http://bugs.pld-linux.org/). 2.6.16 is at least three > years old kernel. upstream is near 2.6.25 already. and th/ti do have 2.6.22 > kernel, do you shout there too? So what? Why not upgrade glibc in ac to 2.7? and XFree to xorg - they are also very old. This is STABLE so minor updates or security updates are welcome. bugs.pld-... is not the place for this request. >> 5. Not mentioning the fact that not everything in AC is signed and >> default config demands signed packages > don't enable such trees then. signed in ac are 'ac' and 'ac-updates' > and 'ac-supported' trees only. Yes I mean only ac and ac-updates >> AC was intended as STABLE!!!!!!! > definition of stable can vary. > >> To AC RM (whoever it is) if you wanna sandbox play with HEAD or make >> another fork like Ti but please leave STABLE pld as stable. >> This changes are making users which are for years with pld leaving us. > reporting bugs early might get them resolved. just whining won't lead you > anywhere. > > and if you definition of stable is old packages, why bother upgrading > packages > from ac-updates afterall? updates was intended to security, bugfix updates. whats the difference between ac/ti/th when you can update everything?? Maybe let's update RA to kernel 2.6.25 Best regards. -- T. _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en