Re: [arch-dev-public] For how long should we support a smooth update?

On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 18:23:27 +0100 Pierre Schmitz pie...@archlinux.de wrote: Hi all, because our development is always moving forward we sometimes need to break compatibility with old installations of Arch. For example switching to xz as compression for all packages of course requires a

Re: [arch-dev-public] For how long should we support a smooth update?

On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 11:28:12 +0100 Dieter Plaetinck die...@plaetinck.be wrote: interesting question. Isn't it already in our guidelines/recommendations somewhere that Arch users need to update their system regularly (at least weekly or so), and if they don't like that, Arch is not for them?

[arch-dev-public] Integrity Check i686: core, extra, community 12-12-2010

= Integrity Check i686 of core,extra,community = Performing integrity checks... == parsing pkgbuilds == parsing db files == checking mismatches == checking archs == checking dependencies == checking

[arch-dev-public] Integrity Check x86_64: core, extra, community, multilib 12-12-2010

Warning : the repository multilib does not exist in /srv/abs/rsync/any === = Integrity Check x86_64 of core,extra,community,multilib = === Performing integrity checks... == parsing

[arch-dev-public] Mailman updated, let's hope for the best

We just updated mailman. If this mail arrives, we are happy! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-dev-public] Mailman updated, let's hope for the best

On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 14:44:06 +0100, Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org wrote: We just updated mailman. If this mail arrives, we are happy! Yes we are. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] bash 4.1.009-3

Hi, the main difference between this and bash from [core] is that /etc/profile.bash has been removed as it is no longer sourced by /etc/profile (see filesystem package). This package was in testing for 2 weeks and I am not aware of any real problem here. This is now similar to Debian/Ubuntu and

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] zlib 1.2.5-3

On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:39:19 +1000, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote: On 20/11/10 14:31, Pierre Schmitz wrote: This is a core rebuild/cleanup. I have also added a workaround for a bug in recent gcc versions. See https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/20647 (bug report title is a little

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] procps-3.2.8-3

Hi, procps-3.2.8-3 is in testing. Added patch to fix Unknown HZ value! on some machines. Please test and signoff. Eric

Re: [arch-dev-public] tcp_wrappers- does anyone actually use it?

Got very little feedback on this last time...any votes? Saw another thread[1] in the forums today about it causing problems with mpd this time around... -Dan [1] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=109962 On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Dan McGee dpmc...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep

Re: [arch-dev-public] For how long should we support a smooth update?

On 12/12/10 03:23, Pierre Schmitz wrote: Hi all, because our development is always moving forward we sometimes need to break compatibility with old installations of Arch. For example switching to xz as compression for all packages of course requires a version of libarchive which can handle it.

Re: [arch-dev-public] tcp_wrappers- does anyone actually use it?

On 13/12/10 11:04, Dan McGee wrote: Got very little feedback on this last time...any votes? Saw another thread[1] in the forums today about it causing problems with mpd this time around... Never particularly used it... and if iptables is the better solution then I am happy for it to be

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] lvm2/device-mapper 2.02.78-1

Hi, lvm2/device-mapper 2.02.78-1 are in testing. Please test and signoff. Signoffs from users are welcome. - Minor upstream update. ChangeLog below. Version 2.02.78 - 6th December 2010 === Abort if segment tag allocation fails in pool format _add_stripe_seg.