Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] dhcpcd 5.1.3

2009-11-10 Thread Allan McRae
Ionut Biru wrote: On 11/06/2009 02:04 AM, Ronald van Haren wrote: Hi, Minor upstream update. Please signoff for both architectures. Ronald signoff x86_64 signoff i686

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] fakeroot-1.14.3-1

2009-11-10 Thread Allan McRae
Allan McRae wrote: Thomas Bächler wrote: Allan McRae schrieb: Am Sun, 01 Nov 2009 15:22:19 +1000 schrieb Allan McRae : Upstream update. Signoff both, Allan This package still has a useless post_install message displayed on each upgrade. The message suggests that in the case of problems,

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] devtools-0.8.0

2009-11-10 Thread Allan McRae
Allan McRae wrote: Hi, A new devtools release has been pushed to [testing]. Everything works on a brief test here, but I thought it a good idea to do some testing before pushing to [extra]. Is everyone happy with me moving this? We do have the issue of SRCDEST not working that great in

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] pacman 3.3.3-1

2009-11-10 Thread Dan McGee
Minor upstream updates, please signoff 2x per architecture. -Dan VERSION DESCRIPTION - 3.3.3 - correctly check the return code from opendir() - fix possible infinite loop in alpm_list_remove

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.31.6-1

2009-11-10 Thread Ionut Biru
On 11/10/2009 08:57 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote: Minor upstream update, please sign off. Tested on x86_64 only. Btw, we should have a "fast to core" policy for minor kernel updates, which means they should be signed off within 24 hours - let's try it. signoff x86_64 -- Ionut

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.31.6-1

2009-11-10 Thread Dan McGee
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote: > Am Dienstag 10 November 2009 19:57:43 schrieb Thomas Bächler: >> signed off >> > x86_64 Signoff i686 -Dan

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.31.6-1

2009-11-10 Thread Pierre Schmitz
Am Dienstag 10 November 2009 19:57:43 schrieb Thomas Bächler: > signed off > x86_64 -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

[arch-dev-public] [PATCH] rc.sysinit: background hwclock calls

2009-11-10 Thread Dan McGee
hwclock calls appear to block somewhere between 1 and 2 seconds when we have back-to-back calls. My theory (without looking at the code) is that hwclock has to synchronize to the 1 second intervals of the hardware clock, so it can sometimes take up to a second to complete. To get around this unple

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.31.6-1

2009-11-10 Thread Thomas Bächler
Minor upstream update, please sign off. Tested on x86_64 only. Btw, we should have a "fast to core" policy for minor kernel updates, which means they should be signed off within 24 hours - let's try it. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] glibc-2.11 toolchain rebuild

2009-11-10 Thread Dan McGee
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Allan McRae schrieb: >> >> Allan McRae wrote: >>> >>> I have put the glibc-2.11 toolchain rebuild in [testing].  Apart from >>> glibc-2.11, the kernel header patch level got bumped to the latest version >>> and I took a newer snapshot of the

Re: [arch-dev-public] Upstream bug closures

2009-11-10 Thread Paul Mattal
James Rayner wrote: Jan de Groot wrote: I see a lot of bugs getting closed with "Upstream" lately because they're not packaging bugs. This is not the way to solve bugs. The only bugs that should be closed upstream are the ones in binary modules like flashplugin or nvidia binary drivers. Opensour

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] glibc-2.11 toolchain rebuild

2009-11-10 Thread Thomas Bächler
Allan McRae schrieb: Allan McRae wrote: I have put the glibc-2.11 toolchain rebuild in [testing]. Apart from glibc-2.11, the kernel header patch level got bumped to the latest version and I took a newer snapshot of the binutils-2.20 branch. From a quick look at the changelog there should no