Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 00:52:31 -0500 Myra Nelson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM, P .NIKOLIC > wrote: > > On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:52:25 -0500 > > "David C. Rankin" wrote: > > > >> On 06/07/2012 02:35 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: > >> > Thanks folks .. > >> > > >> > Now to tackle the laptop and get it ready for a couple of months > >> > duty whilst laid up in dang hospital .. > >> > > >> > Pete . > >> > >> Advise, > >> > >> 'Stay out of the hospital!' -> they only make you sicker > >> there... Good luck and a speedy recovery. > >> > > > > Hi David .. > > > > I wish i could but it is that or wheelchair so .. > > > > > > Pete . > > > > > > -- > > Linux 7-of-9 3.3.7-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 22 00:26:26 CEST > > 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > I just can't resist. > > The other "Stay out of the hospital" is you also might need a lawyer - > oh yeah David qualifies. > HUmm yes had not thought of that one but yes mind you wrong side of the pond cheers Pete . -- Linux 7-of-9 3.3.7-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 22 00:26:26 CEST 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: > On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:52:25 -0500 > "David C. Rankin" wrote: > >> On 06/07/2012 02:35 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: >> > Thanks folks .. >> > >> > Now to tackle the laptop and get it ready for a couple of months >> > duty whilst laid up in dang hospital .. >> > >> > Pete . >> >> Advise, >> >> 'Stay out of the hospital!' -> they only make you sicker there... >> Good luck and a speedy recovery. >> > > Hi David .. > > I wish i could but it is that or wheelchair so .. > > > Pete . > > > -- > Linux 7-of-9 3.3.7-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 22 00:26:26 CEST 2012 > x86_64 GNU/Linux I just can't resist. The other "Stay out of the hospital" is you also might need a lawyer - oh yeah David qualifies. -- Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] linux-3.3.8-1
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 08:08:43PM +0530, Sudaraka Wijesinghe wrote: > On 06/07/12 19:52, gt wrote: > > > > I am getting the following error: > > > > linux-headers-3.3.8-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz: invalid or corrupted package (PGP > > signature) > > I believe you need to download the corresponding .sig file as well. > Make sure you have the correct file, it's difficult to distinguish them > using the name displayed on the download page without looking at the link. pacman downloads the related .sig files from the server itself. I still manually downloaded it to be sure. Can you confirm the md5sum of the following files: 029cd1a8f49cdfc116c7aa9fea84db8f linux-headers-3.3.8-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz 63d24b019ec4fd9a7d353cee02adc4e1 linux-headers-3.3.8-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz.sig
Re: [arch-general] Dovecot problem after update today
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/30181 Non-breaking space, 0x00a0 needs to be replaced with actual space, 0x0020
Re: [arch-general] CUPS *still* stuck at "rendering completed"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi David, On 06/07/12 11:36, David C. Rankin wrote: > On 06/06/2012 04:17 PM, David Benfell wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Just got the latest update to the cups package. I've been being >> bitten by the "rendering completed" bug for (I think) the last >> three revisions. This hasn't fixed it. >> > > David, > > > How are you testing to see that you are sticking at 'rendering > completed'? > For me, the issue is constant. I am unable to print--except the initial printer test page--at all under any circumstances. I see 'rendering completed' in the CUPS job and printer status (via localhost:631), the logs show that everything is fine (except with some PPD files that I'm not using and therefore *hope* are irrelevant), and I don't know how intelligently to proceed further. - -- David Benfell benf...@parts-unknown.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJP0UG0AAoJELT202JKF+xpE98P/iIQHnCsV5Yoy9e2uVunY6n1 Rg6FzGzxt3900XETb0/bgF2QbwmJnJXt/N3upO6ue7SgOrIlyRzf6WaSUB+MBo9z tye1mB6W25bJMAfMe9ccSJTQbGbtdvEF5bJiBOMtJuL0bxi04hIHU2pAUVBxF3GJ JMUFUgsPh8dDoB6888deatv0TISXsA2kjyzmXGEQjRxpTZoCaZ9zE0h6/9tMq/DJ VVl10FCDdh0jh7jaX3hm4pTrwdIbFytC46BZ1p4/7ch2oPGMtx2bHLTQTThEr9Xm XEfrlC019iZV9yiQK0YpKcl0C7IgeiVvCt47vIYQkh0MCKHVfT3UxUtRq/h2P+Z6 CkqA1ofacJ2B4HFxvuPXOyhOpIgR7eGxABtZGlQ8TwY9HFP34WnG0HZBrP2v7unU lU6k6nF6bwLahvJLWMGfgZh3BUXWhOqHMUO7NIKXj7WUG1JcLDx4J/MbkRMezk/q g/fuckqnMhpKyMzORdPSnxaBwqmUrQAiyRiYPUJ7PJVx/daea1juXoOePFEUqpRA O17lVedMwWESzCeyJosAs8xgPe5t6Q0CGK+XC09satnwy7zMJ/8140S1xtKEBSOJ +TgRTuo3SrEjVNjz1CyzAiHcKp/YEbdzMqeIfWbZgUDypjXfahB2Zio7PHrf2tp7 wumCSn2O39WRMsAfhPVz =sPst -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:52:25 -0500 "David C. Rankin" wrote: > On 06/07/2012 02:35 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: > > Thanks folks.. > > > > Now to tackle the laptop and get it ready for a couple of months > > duty whilst laid up in dang hospital .. > > > > Pete . > > Advise, > >'Stay out of the hospital!' -> they only make you sicker there... > Good luck and a speedy recovery. > Hi David .. I wish i could but it is that or wheelchair so .. Pete . -- Linux 7-of-9 3.3.7-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 22 00:26:26 CEST 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Re: [arch-general] virtualbox-bin aur - vboxdrv -> dkms -> confusion...
2012/6/7 David C. Rankin : > On 06/05/2012 04:20 PM, Genes MailLists wrote: >> >> Is there a benefit to the AUR version over the Community version? They >> should be feature equivalent now. >> > > I always thought you had to use the aur version for usb functionality. May > have changed, but I have just always used the aur package with the > virtualbox-ext-oracle aur package as well. > > > -- > David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Sun Virtualbox had before a OSE version without usb support and a PUEL version with usb support. Currently, Oracle provides a OSE version (GPL3) and also an extension to add usb support (PUEL). Rafael
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On 06/07/2012 02:35 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: Thanks folks.. Now to tackle the laptop and get it ready for a couple of months duty whilst laid up in dang hospital .. Pete . Advise, 'Stay out of the hospital!' -> they only make you sicker there... Good luck and a speedy recovery. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 20:04:10 +0100 "P .NIKOLIC" wrote: > Hi > > Just done a "pacman -Syu" i get the following error below > is there a recomended way around the problem of var/lock and var/run > is it safe to delete them to update . > > > > resolving dependencies... > looking for inter-conflicts... > > Targets (6): filesystem-2012.6-2 git-1.7.10.4-1 icu-49.1.2-1 > krb5-1.10.2-1 libsystemd-185-1 systemd-tools-185-1 > > Total Installed Size: 49.60 MiB > Net Upgrade Size: 0.25 MiB > > Proceed with installation? [Y/n] > (6/6) checking package integrity > [##] 100% (6/6) loading package > files[##] 100% (6/6) > checking for file conflicts [##] > 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) > filesystem: /var/lock exists in filesystem filesystem: /var/run exists > in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. > > > > Pete . > Thanks folks.. Now to tackle the laptop and get it ready for a couple of months duty whilst laid up in dang hospital .. Pete . -- Linux 7-of-9 3.3.7-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 22 00:26:26 CEST 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[arch-general] Dovecot problem after update today
I have just updated my system earlier today - it seems to boot OK apart from a warning and Fail flag where the daemons start (in the list before graphical X starts) about an erroneous line 1 in /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/dovecot.conf which only has one line in my system: d /var/run/dovecot 0755 root dovecot - I am running x64_64 and appear to be fully up to date with the new filesystem package. I don't know if this is a result of an initscripts error or a symlink problem arising from the recent updates. Does anyone else see this and does anyone have a solution? There appear to be no error messages in dmesg or messages or the daemon log. The system seems to run fine despite the error message - and dovecot seems also to run fine after bootup. -- mike c
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Jun 7, 2012, at 9:08 PM, mike cloaked wrote: > On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:04 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: >> Hi >> >> Just done a "pacman -Syu" i get the following error below >> is there a recomended way around the problem of var/lock and var/run >> is it safe to delete them to update . >> >> > According to the posts I saw the way forward is to do (as root): > pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force > > I did this and the update continues - you get warnings at the end of it as > warning: directory permissions differ on sys/ > filesystem: 755 package: 555 > > This is the new "normal" and the system should then work fine after > that upgrade of filesystem > -- > mike c Take care to do it if and only if /var/lock and /var/run are already symlinks ! On my installation they were mounted as tmpfs, which required more intervention.
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Jun 7, 2012, at 9:06 PM, Kacper Żuk wrote: > W dniu 07.06.2012 21:04, P .NIKOLIC pisze: >> Hi >> >> Just done a "pacman -Syu" i get the following error below >> is there a recomended way around the problem of var/lock and var/run >> is it safe to delete them to update . >> > > Check > http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesystem-upgrade-manual-intervention-required-1/ I just resolved the problem on my server, you can stop the services that have files in /var/run and /var/lock. Then delete the directories and create the symlink. I managed to get it work without stopping all services (remote control via ssh). And as mentionned by Javier & Kacper: http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesystem-upgrade-manual-intervention-required-1/
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:04 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: > Hi > > Just done a "pacman -Syu" i get the following error below > is there a recomended way around the problem of var/lock and var/run > is it safe to delete them to update . > > According to the posts I saw the way forward is to do (as root): pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force I did this and the update continues - you get warnings at the end of it as warning: directory permissions differ on sys/ filesystem: 755 package: 555 This is the new "normal" and the system should then work fine after that upgrade of filesystem -- mike c
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:04 PM, P .NIKOLIC wrote: > Hi > > Just done a "pacman -Syu" i get the following error below > ... > > Targets (6): filesystem-2012.6-2 git-1.7.10.4-1 icu-49.1.2-1 > krb5-1.10.2-1 libsystemd-185-1 systemd-tools-185-1 > > ... > 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) > filesystem: /var/lock exists in filesystem filesystem: /var/run exists > in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. > > > Pete . http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesystem-upgrade-manual-intervention-required-1 -- Javier.
Re: [arch-general] update problem maybe ..
W dniu 07.06.2012 21:04, P .NIKOLIC pisze: Hi Just done a "pacman -Syu" i get the following error below is there a recomended way around the problem of var/lock and var/run is it safe to delete them to update . Check http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesystem-upgrade-manual-intervention-required-1/
[arch-general] update problem maybe ..
Hi Just done a "pacman -Syu" i get the following error below is there a recomended way around the problem of var/lock and var/run is it safe to delete them to update . resolving dependencies... looking for inter-conflicts... Targets (6): filesystem-2012.6-2 git-1.7.10.4-1 icu-49.1.2-1 krb5-1.10.2-1 libsystemd-185-1 systemd-tools-185-1 Total Installed Size: 49.60 MiB Net Upgrade Size: 0.25 MiB Proceed with installation? [Y/n] (6/6) checking package integrity [##] 100% (6/6) loading package files[##] 100% (6/6) checking for file conflicts [##] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) filesystem: /var/lock exists in filesystem filesystem: /var/run exists in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. Pete . -- Linux 7-of-9 3.3.7-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 22 00:26:26 CEST 2012 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Re: [arch-general] virtualbox-bin aur - vboxdrv -> dkms -> confusion...
On 06/05/2012 04:20 PM, Genes MailLists wrote: Is there a benefit to the AUR version over the Community version? They should be feature equivalent now. I always thought you had to use the aur version for usb functionality. May have changed, but I have just always used the aur package with the virtualbox-ext-oracle aur package as well. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] CUPS *still* stuck at "rendering completed"
On 06/06/2012 04:17 PM, David Benfell wrote: Hi, Just got the latest update to the cups package. I've been being bitten by the "rendering completed" bug for (I think) the last three revisions. This hasn't fixed it. What I had found previously was that this seemed to be an upstream bug in which jobs submitted after a test page print (which succeeds) would hang at the "rendering completed" stage and never actually print. Now it even fails to appear in the correct queue. Am I missing something? Thanks! David, I don't know if this is the same problem, but I have had almost identical issues for the past couple of months. Specifically with LibreOffice (and openOffice) I print to a hp laserjet 4100N configured via cups on my arch server (phoenix). So my printing looks like this: [my box] -> LAN -> [phoenix] -> LAN -> 4100N When I start LO, if I open a document and print within the first minute or so, everything prints fine. If I don't print for a couple of minutes, then when I try to print, nothing happens. If I restart LO, then I can print again during the first minute or so. I can always print from kde apps, so I don't know why the Gtk apps seem to have this problem. I don't know if this is the same rendering complete issue you are seeing, but this has been hard for me to isolate and track down. How are you testing to see that you are sticking at 'rendering completed'? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] linux-3.3.8-1
Am Donnerstag, den 07.06.2012, 10:51 +0200 schrieb Tobias Powalowski: > > > anyone for i686? Works fine here on my laptop. -- xmpp: b...@schafweide.org bjo.nord-west.org | nord-west.org | freifunk-ol.de
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] linux-3.3.8-1
On 06/07/12 19:52, gt wrote: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 10:51:26AM +0200, Tobias Powalowski wrote: >> Am 06.06.2012 17:13, schrieb Sudaraka Wijesinghe: >>> On 06/06/12 18:31, Tobias Powalowski wrote: Hi guys, please signoff 3.3.8 series for both arches. package is not in testing, please grab it from here: http://dev.archlinux.org/~tpowa/linux/ This will move to [core] directly, because 3.4.1 is in [testing]. greetings tpowa >>> Just installed and rebooted x86_64, all seem to be good. >>> >> anyone for i686? > > I am getting the following error: > > linux-headers-3.3.8-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz: invalid or corrupted package (PGP > signature) > I believe you need to download the corresponding .sig file as well. Make sure you have the correct file, it's difficult to distinguish them using the name displayed on the download page without looking at the link. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] linux-3.3.8-1
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 10:51:26AM +0200, Tobias Powalowski wrote: > Am 06.06.2012 17:13, schrieb Sudaraka Wijesinghe: > > On 06/06/12 18:31, Tobias Powalowski wrote: > >> Hi guys, > >> please signoff 3.3.8 series for both arches. > >> package is not in testing, please grab it from here: > >> http://dev.archlinux.org/~tpowa/linux/ > >> > >> This will move to [core] directly, because 3.4.1 is in [testing]. > >> > >> greetings > >> tpowa > >> > > Just installed and rebooted x86_64, all seem to be good. > > > anyone for i686? I am getting the following error: linux-headers-3.3.8-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz: invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] linux-3.3.8-1
Am 06.06.2012 17:13, schrieb Sudaraka Wijesinghe: > On 06/06/12 18:31, Tobias Powalowski wrote: >> Hi guys, >> please signoff 3.3.8 series for both arches. >> package is not in testing, please grab it from here: >> http://dev.archlinux.org/~tpowa/linux/ >> >> This will move to [core] directly, because 3.4.1 is in [testing]. >> >> greetings >> tpowa >> > Just installed and rebooted x86_64, all seem to be good. > anyone for i686? -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tp...@archlinux.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Re: [RFC] another base cleanup
[ Erf, resending to general list. This forbidden write access to the dev list is somewhat frustrating. ] The 06/06/12, Tobias Powalowski wrote: > Well, I'm not sure if this would make life simpler, > A current x86_64 base install is 119 packages with 450MB do you still > want to fragment this? This would be sensible for some real use cases (e.g. building LXC systems, thin stations, PXE minimal systems mounting / or /usr from a remote, etc). -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [arch-general] UEFI secure boot
On 5 June 2012 22:54, Joe(theWordy)Philbrook wrote: > > Speaking as an Arch user who is just barely competent enough for Arch with > much dependence on google and Arch's most excellent wiki, I'd like to see > Arch continue to do what I see as one of it's strong points. > > Yes it insists on it's users having a certain level of competence. But it > generally seems willing to include fairly detailed step by step tutorials > and guides in it's wiki, to help those with less (or outdated) technical > expertise become more competent. > > So how about somebody who knows how to disable secure boot on x86 devices > post a good howto in the wiki (or if that would be reinventing the wheel, a > link to a good external guide.)? AFAIK this depends on the motherboard, so a general description of how to disable secure boot is probably not viable. > And likewise, in case some Arch user should inadvertently acquire some PC > where somehow the firmware option to disable "Secure Boot" wasn't there. How > about somebody who knows how to add an "Arch key" to UEFI, posting a wiki > tutorial for that? Ditto.
