Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
2012/1/17 Thomas Bächler > Am 16.01.2012 23:31, schrieb Mauro Santos: > > The first one used to be commented in the config file and the second one > > used to be in the documentation if I remember correctly. Both are gone > > from the pacman.conf man page, 'ILoveCandy' still works though :p Are > > these omissions intentional or are they a bug? > > ILoveCandy was never documented. > > Too bad. It is cute :D -- Frederic Bezies fredbez...@gmail.com
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
Am 16.01.2012 23:31, schrieb Mauro Santos: > The first one used to be commented in the config file and the second one > used to be in the documentation if I remember correctly. Both are gone > from the pacman.conf man page, 'ILoveCandy' still works though :p Are > these omissions intentional or are they a bug? ILoveCandy was never documented. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On 01/16/2012 06:28 PM, Sébastien le Preste de Vauban wrote: El 16/01/12 23:10, Karol Blazewicz escribió: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Sébastien le Preste de Vauban wrote: error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. Did you edit pacman.conf and uncommented 'SigLevel = Optional TrustAll'? I forgot to mention that after upgrading pacman I was told to pacman-key --init Maybe this enabled the sig checking? It does not I just ran that after i merged the pacnew and it did not check for any signatures. I think you just missed merging the new pacnew file in to your old conf
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
El 16/01/12 23:27, Karol Blazewicz escribió: meant that there was no sig checking for now. if this is correct why pacman is looking for signatures? btw, there is no 'SigLevel = Optional TrustAll' option in my /etc/pacman.conf file, should I just add this line? Did you merge pacnew files? ok, problem solved, I should had read the announcement in the front page. Sorry.
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
El 16/01/12 23:10, Karol Blazewicz escribió: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Sébastien le Preste de Vauban wrote: error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. Did you edit pacman.conf and uncommented 'SigLevel = Optional TrustAll'? I forgot to mention that after upgrading pacman I was told to pacman-key --init Maybe this enabled the sig checking?
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
> meant that there was no sig checking for now. if this is correct why pacman > is looking for signatures? > > btw, there is no 'SigLevel = Optional TrustAll' option in my > /etc/pacman.conf file, should I just add this line? Did you merge pacnew files?
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
El 16/01/12 23:10, Karol Blazewicz escribió: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Sébastien le Preste de Vauban wrote: error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. Did you edit pacman.conf and uncommented 'SigLevel = Optional TrustAll'? nope but I thought that https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/x86_64/pacman/ has a link "View Changes", which points to a commit by dreisner: upgpkg: pacman 4.0.1-4 - disable sig checking by default meant that there was no sig checking for now. if this is correct why pacman is looking for signatures? btw, there is no 'SigLevel = Optional TrustAll' option in my /etc/pacman.conf file, should I just add this line?
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Sébastien le Preste de Vauban wrote: > error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package (PGP > signature)) > Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. Did you edit pacman.conf and uncommented 'SigLevel = Optional TrustAll'?
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
El 16/01/12 20:24, Mauro Santos escribió: On 16-01-2012 22:50, Uli Armbruster wrote: * Karol Blazewicz [16.01.2012 23:33]: On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Mauro Santos wrote: On 16-01-2012 21:52, Thomas Bächler wrote: Your question is probably about signatures. We're not entirely there yet, but as pacman 4 brings lots of other fixes and improvements, it was a good idea to move it. I was merging the .pacnew files and some options that were on the "old" pacman.conf are not present in the "new" one, namely 'ShowSize' and 'ILoveCandy'. VerbosePkgLists is the new ShowSize. And 'ILoveCandy' was never in the default pacman.conf, that's a hidden gimmick for us cool people ;) I know it wasn't in the default pacman.conf but I think it was documented. Either way, pacman is on the loose and can't be caught :p pacman --version .--. Pacman v4.0.1 - libalpm v7.0.1 / _.-' .-. .-. .-. Copyright (C) 2006-2011 Pacman Development Team \ '-. '-' '-' '-' Copyright (C) 2002-2006 Judd Vinet '--' This program may be freely redistributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License. sudo pacman -Syu :: Synchronizing package databases... core is up to date extra is up to date community is up to date archlinuxfr is up to date :: Starting full system upgrade... resolving dependencies... looking for inter-conflicts... Targets (14): cmake-2.8.7-2 intltool-0.50.0-1 libreoffice-base-3.4.5-1 libreoffice-calc-3.4.5-1 libreoffice-common-3.4.5-1 libreoffice-es-3.4.5-1 libreoffice-extension-typo-3.4.5-1 libreoffice-impress-3.4.5-1 libreoffice-writer-3.4.5-1 pacman-contrib-4.0.1-1 sdl_image-1.2.11-1 sdl_mixer-1.2.12-1 sdl_net-1.2.8-1 sdl_ttf-2.0.11-1 Total Installed Size: 277,30 MiB Net Upgrade Size: 0,24 MiB Proceed with installation? [Y/n] Y (14/14) checking package integrity [#] 100% error: cmake: signature from "Dave Reisner " is unknown trust error: intltool: signature from "Eric Belanger " is unknown trust error: libreoffice-es: signature from "Andreas Radke " is unknown trust error: libreoffice-common: signature from "Andreas Radke " is unknown trust error: libreoffice-base: signature from "Andreas Radke " is unknown trust error: libreoffice-calc: signature from "Andreas Radke " is unknown trust error: libreoffice-extension-typo: signature from "Andreas Radke " is unknown trust error: libreoffice-impress: signature from "Andreas Radke " is unknown trust error: libreoffice-writer: signature from "Andreas Radke " is unknown trust error: pacman-contrib: signature from "Allan McRae " is unknown trust error: sdl_image: signature from "Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) " is unknown trust error: sdl_mixer: signature from "Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) " is unknown trust error: sdl_net: signature from "Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) " is unknown trust error: sdl_ttf: signature from "Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) " is unknown trust error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. =(
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On 16-01-2012 22:50, Uli Armbruster wrote: > * Karol Blazewicz [16.01.2012 23:33]: >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Mauro Santos >> wrote: >>> On 16-01-2012 21:52, Thomas Bächler wrote: Your question is probably about signatures. We're not entirely there yet, but as pacman 4 brings lots of other fixes and improvements, it was a good idea to move it. >>> >>> I was merging the .pacnew files and some options that were on the "old" >>> pacman.conf are not present in the "new" one, namely 'ShowSize' and >>> 'ILoveCandy'. >> >> VerbosePkgLists is the new ShowSize. > > And 'ILoveCandy' was never in the default pacman.conf, that's a hidden > gimmick for us cool people ;) > I know it wasn't in the default pacman.conf but I think it was documented. Either way, pacman is on the loose and can't be caught :p -- Mauro Santos
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:59:16 +0100 Giorgio Lando wrote: > On Mon 16/01/12, 23:50, Uli Armbruster wrote: > > And 'ILoveCandy' was never in the default pacman.conf, that's a hidden > > gimmick for us cool people ;) > > It is a secret which should not even be named in public Erm, it's on wikipedia page about easter eggs... -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On 01/16/2012 05:59 PM, Giorgio Lando wrote: > It is a secret which should not even be named in public Too late. They know. They're coming. -- Scott Lawrence signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On Mon 16/01/12, 23:50, Uli Armbruster wrote: > And 'ILoveCandy' was never in the default pacman.conf, that's a hidden > gimmick for us cool people ;) It is a secret which should not even be named in public
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
* Karol Blazewicz [16.01.2012 23:33]: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Mauro Santos > wrote: > > On 16-01-2012 21:52, Thomas Bächler wrote: > >> > >> Your question is probably about signatures. We're not entirely there > >> yet, but as pacman 4 brings lots of other fixes and improvements, it was > >> a good idea to move it. > > > > I was merging the .pacnew files and some options that were on the "old" > > pacman.conf are not present in the "new" one, namely 'ShowSize' and > > 'ILoveCandy'. > > VerbosePkgLists is the new ShowSize. And 'ILoveCandy' was never in the default pacman.conf, that's a hidden gimmick for us cool people ;)
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Mauro Santos wrote: > On 16-01-2012 21:52, Thomas Bächler wrote: >> >> Your question is probably about signatures. We're not entirely there >> yet, but as pacman 4 brings lots of other fixes and improvements, it was >> a good idea to move it. > > I was merging the .pacnew files and some options that were on the "old" > pacman.conf are not present in the "new" one, namely 'ShowSize' and > 'ILoveCandy'. VerbosePkgLists is the new ShowSize.
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On 16-01-2012 21:52, Thomas Bächler wrote: > > Your question is probably about signatures. We're not entirely there > yet, but as pacman 4 brings lots of other fixes and improvements, it was > a good idea to move it. I was merging the .pacnew files and some options that were on the "old" pacman.conf are not present in the "new" one, namely 'ShowSize' and 'ILoveCandy'. The first one used to be commented in the config file and the second one used to be in the documentation if I remember correctly. Both are gone from the pacman.conf man page, 'ILoveCandy' still works though :p Are these omissions intentional or are they a bug? -- Mauro Santos
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Rogutės Sparnuotos wrote: > Did you test it re. "never-before seen errors" or did you look at the > .pacnew files? > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/x86_64/pacman/ has a link "View > Changes", which points to a commit by dreisner: > upgpkg: pacman 4.0.1-4 > - disable sig checking by default I meant the pacnew files, not disabling sig checking in makepkg.
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
Am 16.01.2012 22:12, schrieb Karol Blazewicz: > Is it for real or is it an error? > > I know that you should merge pacnew files first, I'm fine with the > move, but something tells me we're going to see many users baffled by > pacman throwing never-before seen errors. > Not that I mind Arch being a less hand-holding distro and actually > requiring common sense ;P Your question is probably about signatures. We're not entirely there yet, but as pacman 4 brings lots of other fixes and improvements, it was a good idea to move it. If you want to use signed packages (and are okay that databases aren't signed yet, and not everything is signed), you can follow [1]. [1] http://allanmcrae.com/2011/12/pacman-package-signing-4-arch-linux/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:28:00 +0200 Rogutės Sparnuotos wrote: > Karol Blazewicz (2012-01-16 22:12): > > Is it for real or is it an error? > > > > I know that you should merge pacnew files first, I'm fine with the > > move, but something tells me we're going to see many users baffled by > > pacman throwing never-before seen errors. > > Not that I mind Arch being a less hand-holding distro and actually > > requiring common sense ;P > > Did you test it re. "never-before seen errors" or did you look at the > .pacnew files? > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/x86_64/pacman/ has a link "View > Changes", which points to a commit by dreisner: > upgpkg: pacman 4.0.1-4 > - disable sig checking by default > > http://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/pacman&id=d2e1fdaeb778c08e7be9da54602778a88ab7c792 > libarchive 3 had to go to [core], so pacman 3.5 had either be recompiled or removed. -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] pacman 4 in [core]
Karol Blazewicz (2012-01-16 22:12): > Is it for real or is it an error? > > I know that you should merge pacnew files first, I'm fine with the > move, but something tells me we're going to see many users baffled by > pacman throwing never-before seen errors. > Not that I mind Arch being a less hand-holding distro and actually > requiring common sense ;P Did you test it re. "never-before seen errors" or did you look at the .pacnew files? https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/x86_64/pacman/ has a link "View Changes", which points to a commit by dreisner: upgpkg: pacman 4.0.1-4 - disable sig checking by default http://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/pacman&id=d2e1fdaeb778c08e7be9da54602778a88ab7c792 -- -- Rogutės Sparnuotos
