Re: [arch-general] Why not mksh provides(ksh)?
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:21:16 -0700 G. Richard Bellamy rbell...@pteradigm.com wrote: Not sure if this is the correct venue for this comment, and apologies if it's already been mentioned, but why wouldn't mksh [1] provide ksh? This would alleviate some AUR dependency weirdness, specifically with the oracle-sqldeveloper [2] package, which currently forces an install of ksh [3], even though it'll work just fine with mksh. -rb [1] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/mksh/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/oracle-sqldeveloper/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ksh/ Hello, that's because mksh by default does not provide a ksh binary, nor did it contain a mode to behave exactly like the ksh if called by this name, the extensions are always active. (It's been some years since I took the package and took a glance at the init code, maybe I'm wrong with this, feel free to correct me.) I think it's wrong to place this extended shell in the place of the original ksh. My intention is simply to give users the possibility to install the mksh and the original ksh parallel on the same machine, as they don't collide on the filesystem. If they want to call the mksh as ksh, people can still create a plain symlink for the binary. Also there is only one package that depends on mksh in the repos, kwalletcli. Sven-Hendrik makes no modifications regarding the shell in this PKGBUILD so I assume it's fine. As long as I don't make a problem for another TU or a developer I stay to the current setup of the package, when I add a ksh symlink to the package stating it also provides the ksh I take users the chance to install the original ksh and the mksh. There are users who don't want an extended shell because they work with the original since a lot of years on different systems. Best Regards, Thorsten signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] signature from Thorsten Tpper x...@xxx.xxx is unknown trust
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:56:37 +0100 Sébastien Luttringer se...@seblu.net wrote: Have an archlinux-keyring updated before key expiration is an elegant solution. Cheers, Indeed. Also, it was my mistake not to update the key before it expired and I have to apologize for that. By now there is a new archlinux-keyring package that contains the updated key. I'm sorry for all the trouble this has caused. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] disowned pmount
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:04:20 +0100 Tobias Powalowski tobias.powalow...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 15.02.2012 09:18, schrieb Pierre Schmitz: Am 15.02.2012 09:10, schrieb Tobias Powalowski: Hi feel free to adopt it, I don't use it anymore. greetings tpowa Why not just drop it entirely? Afaik it was once used by KDE3 but isn't needed by any package anymore. +1 Drop it to [community] I'll adopt it. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ GPG-Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] pacman new generation
On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:23:58 -0800 Bernardo Barros bernardobarr...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps the developers want to take a look at this distribution.It is reported that is written in a `purely functional package management' and tries to be a highly safe OS, where `upgrading a system is as reliable as reinstalling from scratch'. http://nixos.org/nixos/ Because the files of a new configuration don’t overwrite old ones, you can (atomically) roll back to a previous configuration. For instance, if after a nixos-rebuild switch you discover that you don’t like the new configuration, you can just go back It can be an inspiration for a new version of pacman rewritten in haskell? Also Don Stewart's talk about 'Scripting with Types' might inspire someone too (BTW since he started arch-haskell I think he is a Arch user): http://donsbot.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/semicolon.pdf Well I'm just a TU but I guess most people here are always pleasured for people bringing up their ideas, when they want to realize them by themselves. Seriously, it's probably meant like this but your mail reads like a Hey why don't you learn $INSERT_LANG_HERE and rewrite your whole system. I've not participated in pacman development myself so I guess I should stfu myself, but for me this proposal just reads like a kick into the faces of Allan, Dan and all the other people who did so. Kind Regards Thorsten -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Can't install e4rat from AUR: pacman fails to install missing dependencies
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 17:44:44 +0200 Lorenzo Bandieri lorenzo.bandi...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everyone! I'm having problems installing E4rat from the AUR ( https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?K=e4ratSeB=x). Installation fails: $ makepkg -s == WARNING: Sudo can not be found. Will use su to acquire root privileges. == Making package: e4rat 0.2.1-2 (Sun Oct 9 17:34:22 CEST 2011) == Checking runtime dependencies... == Checking buildtime dependencies... == Installing missing dependencies... Password: error: target not found: audit == ERROR: 'pacman' failed to install missing dependencies. I performed a search with pacman -Ss, and audit seems not to be in the repos. Has anyone encountered this problem yet? Thanks. Lorenzo I haven't encountered the problem, but there's a solution: Search the AUR when deps for AUR PKGBUILDs are missing. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24070 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] diffutils-3.2-1
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 13:30:13 +1000 Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote: On 03/09/11 20:42, Evangelos Foutras wrote: On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote: Upstream update: * Noteworthy changes in release 3.2 (2011-09-02) [stable] ** Changes in behavior --ignore-file-name-case now applies at the top level too. For example, diff dir inIt might compare dir/Init to inIt. ** New features diff and sdiff have a new option --ignore-trailing-space (-Z). ** Packaging The texinfo documentation no longer specifies front-cover or back-cover texts, so that it may now be included in Debian's main section. Signoff both, Signoff x86_64. Anyone for i686? Allan signoff i686 -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] dnsutils-9.8.1-1
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 12:52:21 +0300 Evangelos Foutras evange...@foutrelis.com wrote: On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org wrote: Hi guys, A new dnsutils package lies in [testing]... again - an upstream update this time. No big changes, mostly bug fixes. For the curious: https://deepthought.isc.org/article/AA-00446/81/ Please test and signoff. Signoff x86_64. signoff i686 -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] dnsutils-9.8.0.P4-2
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:00:50 -0700 Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org wrote: [2011-08-29 10:40:27 +0300] Evangelos Foutras: On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org wrote: Hi everyone, An update to dnsutils is in [testing]; it implements: - FS#25801 (move nsupdate to bind) - FS#25048 (make binaries smaller) Please test and signoff. Signoff x86_64. Somebody for i686? signoff i686 -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] kernel26-lts 2.6.32.46-1
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:38:25 +0200 Tobias Powalowski tobias.powalow...@googlemail.com wrote: Latest LTS kernel is in testing, please signoff for both arches greetings tpowa signoff i686 -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] removing cryptsetup from base group
On Tue, 9 Aug 2011 17:42:32 +0200 Lukas Fleischer archli...@cryptocrack.de wrote: On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 03:37:15PM +0300, Ionut Biru wrote: Hi, this package brings in our clean chroots libgcrypt dependency. Until recently, gnutls had libcrypt as dependency but now it relies on nettle. That means that packages linked to gnutls and relied on libgcrypt dependency from it, will be broken. We have a gnutls 3.0.0 rebuild in progress in staging and because libgcrypt is in our clean chroots, everything is fine, functionality wise but I noticed that we skipped adding ligcrypt to dependency mostly because namcap and us assume that everybody have base group installed. Please check your packages to see if they link to libgcrypt and add it to dependency if they do. -1 to removing cryptsetup from base. Note that cryptsetup is an essential tool for setups with system encryption enabled and is required during boot time. It should also stay on our CDs (not only as available package but also installed on the root-image to allow for using the CD as a Live CD, even if partitions are encrypted; AIF probably depends on it as well). Additionally, removing cryptsetup from base will require users to install it manually when using mkinitcpio's encrypt hook. If you decide to remove it anyway, keep in mind to: * Keep it on our Live CDs. * Add a note to our default /etc/mkinitcpio.conf. * Maybe also add some note in AIF. I agree with Lukas and support his arguments so another -1 for removing the package from the base group. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ GPG-Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] kernel26-lts 2.6.32.44-1
On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:37:13 +0200 Tobias Powalowski tobias.powalow...@googlemail.com wrote: Latest LTS kernel is in testing, please signoff for both arches greetings tpowa signoff x86_64 -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Printer driver
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 22:50:55 +0200 Maciej Sobkowski macie...@maciejjo.pl wrote: Hi, I want to install driver for my Brother DCP-J315W printer. I've downloaded driver files from brother's site, since there is no package, neither in repo nor in aur. It was in deb format, also rpm available. The driver is split into two packages: dcpj315wlpr and dcpj315wcupswrapper. I converted them to tar.gz archive with deb2targz, extracted and I don't know where to put the files to get the driver working. Hierarchy in cupswrapper: /usr/local/Brother/Printer/dcpj315w/cupswrapper/, and there are brcupsconfpt1 brdcpj315w.ppd cupswrapperdcpj315w files. In lpr there is /usr/local/Brother/Printer/dcpj315w/lpd/ where are brdcpj315wfilter filterdcpj315w psconvertij2, and /usr/local/Brother/Printer/dcpj315w/inf/ where are brdcpj315wfunc brio08ba.bcm brio08bc.bcm brio08bf.bcm brio08bk.bcm paperinfij2 brdcpj315wrcbrio08bb.bcm brio08be.bcm brio08bg.bcm ImagingArea setupPrintcapij and also usr/bin with brprintconf_dcpj315w. Should I put them in these directories in my system? maciejjo Well there are quite a bunch of packages[1] in [unsupported] you could use as a reference. I guess taking a package from there and modifying it to fit for your printer, would be the easiest way to handle this. Regards, Thorsten [1]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?O=0K=Brotherdo_Search=Go -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Change Arch's default crond
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 08:41:13 +0200 Sven-Hendrik Haase s...@lutzhaase.com wrote: We all know the situation with dcron (it can't keep time properly) and it still is broken. No fix (or any changes for that matter) have gone into its upstream git for over a year now. There have been multiple yeah-I'll-take-a-looks from various people as well as its upstream maintainer and no work was done. I certainly don't want to offend anybody but I think it is time another crond was made quasi default by swapping it for dcron in base group. I know that users can do that themselves but the we shouldn't suggest packages we know are broken by putting them into the base group. Perhaps fcron is a fine choice. Bug report for reference: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18681 -- Sven-Hendrik As I maintain fcron in [community]: I won't mind if it's decided to replace dcron as default. If I remember correctly, this is the third thread about a replacement because of this bug, so I'd welcome a clear Yes, we decide to replace it with X. or a No, now stop to annoy us.. Still I'm TU not Dev so that's a plain beg. However just as a notice: it's not a plain package replacement, as one other package has to be modified for this, if not there are currently some problems with fcron's build process if that's not done. fcron needs the user and group 'cron' which are later used at the system to exist already at build time, to create these in the chroots is currently not possible to do with devtools, because of missing PAM Authorization within the chroots. Long story short: If it's moved to [core] don't forget to provide a cron user and a cron group[1] with the filesystem package. Regards, Thorsten [1]https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:UID_/_GID_Database -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Package deletion request
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:15:09 +0200 D. Can Celasun dcela...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/2/14 Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkov...@gmail.com On 14 February 2011 13:43, D. Can Celasun dcela...@gmail.com wrote: I've adopted, updated and reuploaded the ejecter[1] package as indicator-ejecter[2] to follow the general naming convention regarding Ayatana packages [3] . Can someone please delete the original ejecter package? [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=20493 [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=46497 [3] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=99746p=1 Thanks. Deleted ejecter. BTW: could you please set the category in your indicator-ejecter package? Lukas Done - thanks for reminding! Can Please send future requests to the aur-general mailing list and not the arch-general list. Regards -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] kernel-2.6.36.3-2
On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 19:38:44 +0100 Tobias Powalowski t.p...@gmx.de wrote: Upstream update. This package is NOT in testing (2.6.37 currently resides there), but at: http://dev.archlinux.org/~tpowa/kernel26/ fixed udev crash #22343 fixed ext3 default mount option #22544 please signoff for both arches. greetings tpowa signoff x86_64 System ran for several hours without a problem or unusual log messages. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] kernel 2.6.37 BKL
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 18:28:42 -0600 Yaro Kasear y...@marupa.net wrote: On Wednesday, January 05, 2011 05:51:02 pm Matthew Monaco wrote: Devs, Any plans about the BKL setting in .37? I've been running the rc's without it for a while now. What is BKL? The Big Kernel Lock, search the Web there are plenty of explanations. A short description is, that it is from the beginning of the Multiprocessor support by Linux which prevents conflicts created by doing some stuff at the central Kernel structures at the same time. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] what happened to nut (network-ups-tools)?
On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 20:03:28 -0600 David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: Guys, Where did nut go? I just checked and network-ups-tools is no longer available. Did it change names? I must have missed it. Thanks. It was moved to AUR since we had no components to really debug it, there was silence from userbase so it was decided to move it in order to give users of this package the possibility to debug and fix the problem by themselves, keeping it in [community] was no fine solution for that. https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/19351 http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-September/010921.html -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] openssl 1.0.0.b-2
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:41:59 +1000 Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote: On 17/11/10 16:43, Pierre Schmitz wrote: On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:40:27 +0100, Pierre Schmitz pie...@archlinux.de wrote: Side note: make test does no longer pass with this version. It might be just the test itself that is broken though (tested different arches and also on Ubuntu). But I need to look into this though. This is now fixed in 1.0.0.b-2. So please sign off that one. signoff i686. Allan Also signoff i686 Thorsten -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] openssl 1.0.0.b-2
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:46:54 +0100 Thorsten Töpper atsut...@freethoughts.de wrote: On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:41:59 +1000 Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote: On 17/11/10 16:43, Pierre Schmitz wrote: On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:40:27 +0100, Pierre Schmitz pie...@archlinux.de wrote: Side note: make test does no longer pass with this version. It might be just the test itself that is broken though (tested different arches and also on Ubuntu). But I need to look into this though. This is now fixed in 1.0.0.b-2. So please sign off that one. signoff i686. Allan Also signoff i686 Thorsten And a signoff for x86_64 (desktop). -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] UbuntuOne
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 13:57:05 -0500 Samir csg...@esamir.com wrote: I've noticed that there are some UbuntuOne related packages in aur, but many of them are very out of date. In theory, I'm told that we should be able to get UbuntuOne working under any Linux distro..I was wondering if there was any reason for the current state of the aur packages. Is there a technicaly issue that prevents us from having more updated packages? As packages in AUR are maintained by common users this has not really to do with Arch itself. from a quick view it seems the Maintainer is inactive. If you want to take care of the package write him a mail asking what's the matter and if he can orphan the package if he is no longer interested in them, if there was no reaction after two weeks, write an orphan request to the [aur-general] mailing list. And one of us TUs will orphan it for you. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Request to orphan package
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 17:53:56 +0200 Laurent Carlier lordhea...@gmail.com wrote: Le samedi 14 août 2010 17:44:19, ptchinster a écrit : Hello, I am the maintainer of eclipse-android (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14544). One of the dependancies is eclipse-classic (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32314) (v3.5 as opposed to 3.6 in the main repos) which is NOT maintained by me. There are several issues with this PKGBUILD including being out of date, not having a working build(), and not offering a correct provides array. The first of which was brought to the current maintainers attention back on May 13th, and he hasn't touched it since. I am willing to adopt this package as soon as orphaned. Thanks, ptchinster You can adopt it! Give it love, love, love! But please send future requests to the [aur-general] mailing list. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.34.2-2
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:39:02 +0200 Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org wrote: This new build fixes the b43 trouble lots of users have been having. This package is NOT in testing (2.6.35 currently resides there), but at: http://dev.archlinux.org/~thomas/kernel26/ Please sign off (also, please someone with the b43 problem test if this is fixed). Kernel runs and b43 works fine at my laptop. Sign-off i686. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.34.2-2
On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:11:27 +0200 Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org wrote: Am 04.08.2010 17:50, schrieb Thorsten Töpper: On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:39:02 +0200 Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org wrote: This new build fixes the b43 trouble lots of users have been having. This package is NOT in testing (2.6.35 currently resides there), but at: http://dev.archlinux.org/~thomas/kernel26/ Please sign off (also, please someone with the b43 problem test if this is fixed). Kernel runs and b43 works fine at my laptop. Sign-off i686. I don't see you among the error reports. Was yours broken with 2.6.34.2-1? It was broken, I did the upgrade yesterday evening but didn't boot the machine since then, so I tested it after I read the mail above and did the upgrade to -2 afterwards. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Chroot 32bit under 64bit; Problems with kernel package
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:22:45 +0930 Jordan Windsor jorda...@gmail.com wrote: I'm following the guide available at this URL: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_Install_bundled_32bit_system Currently I'm stuck on this step: [r...@archpc ~]# pacman --root /opt/arch32 --cachedir /opt/arch32/var/cache/pacman/pkg --config /opt/arch32/pacman.conf -S base base-devel error: failed to prepare transaction (package architecture is not valid) :: package kernel26-i915-2.6.34.1-1-x86_64 does not have a valid architecture I'm wondering how I should go about getting this chroot working. I'll be using the chroot to compile wine, I was unable to get it working with gcc-multilib. Thanks. Why don't you use the devtools to create and use the chroot for packaging? It'll help you a lot: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Building_in_a_Clean_Chroot Thorsten -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Xorg 1.8 Nouveau dependencies
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 12:00:44 +0100 Michishige Kaito chris.webs...@gmail.com wrote: Hey, So, we all heard it doesn't need HAL anymore. But what does it need? It would seem like it depends on either nvidia or nvidia-utils because I got rid of those last night and now X won't start. Well... it _does_ start, but all I get is a bunch of nice coloured stripes across the screen in random angles and sizes. I'm not really sure how to handle this, since I can't seem to access my system now. I'm burning an arch ISO while I type, and gonna try that. Whilst... any tips? You don't need a full reinstall. When you're in grub select the entry, press e, select the kernel line and press e again, add a single 3 to the end of the line and press return to save this, then press b to boot this temporarily modified entry. If that does not work because you start your login manager as a DAEMON, do the same with a single 1 and not a 3, so your System will boot without daemons and you can kick the login manager from the init system and start the daemons by using telinit 3. As I'm not familiar with the new configuration either I can't give you any tips for that. Regards, Thorsten -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] package obsolete dependencies
On Wed, 12 May 2010 23:17:16 +0400 Evgeny Burmentyev vir.fo...@gmail.com wrote: Hello. 1. The qiv package has an obsolete dependency libexif. The 2.2.3 Changelog says: [tw] use gdk_pixbuf to autorotate with EXIF tags instead of libexif. Note: needs at least GDK 2.12 2. The libtorrent will require makedepends=(cppunit) from the next release (it already requires it in the main svn repository). I'm terribly sorry, if I posted in a wrong place (tell me, if I did, and where to post such things next time, for I have some from time to time). File bugreports at http://bugs.archlinux.org/ -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
