Re: [arch-dev-public] Ciao

[2020-08-19 20:59:13 -0400] Daniel M. Capella: > On August 19, 2020 6:43:14 PM EDT, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public > wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > I've joined the Arch team in 2010 and spent a decade as a developer; > > it's been a great privilege to be a par

[arch-dev-public] Ciao

Dear all, I've joined the Arch team in 2010 and spent a decade as a developer; it's been a great privilege to be a part of such an awesome community and also a lot of fun. However I felt the ten-year mark was a good opportunity for me to move on since I recognize the majority's views on the

Re: [arch-dev-public] [aur-general] AUR migration

[2020-07-28 13:46:23 +0100] Filipe Laíns: > If one machine gets compromised the keys are also compromised. I never suggested to use the same keys for multiple servers. Only that if luna's main purpose is to provide a service and this service is moved to a different host, it makes sense to move

Re: [arch-dev-public] [aur-general] AUR migration

[2020-07-27 21:10:23 -0300] Giancarlo Razzolini: > Em julho 27, 2020 21:03 Gaetan Bisson escreveu: > > > > It's quite unsettling that we seem to be rushing to write a news post > > while this very reasonable suggestion remains completely ignored. > > > >

Re: [arch-dev-public] [aur-general] AUR migration

[2020-07-25 00:18:55 +0200] Baptiste Jonglez: > On 24-07-20, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public wrote: > > The migration is almost done. Since we are moving to a new machine, it will > > have new host keys. They are: > > > >Ed25519: SHA256:RFzBCUItH9LZS0cKB5UE6ceAYhBD5C8GeOBip8Z11+4 > >

Re: [arch-dev-public] repos.archlinux.org has been migrated to a new server

[2020-06-26 10:37:44 +0200] Jelle van der Waa: > On 26/06/2020 02:50, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public wrote: > > Hi Jelle, > > > > [2020-06-25 23:36:15 +0200] Jelle van der Waa: > >> repos.archlinux.org, svn.archlinux.org and rsync.archlinux.org are now > &g

Re: [arch-dev-public] repos.archlinux.org has been migrated to a new server

Hi Jelle, [2020-06-25 23:36:15 +0200] Jelle van der Waa: > repos.archlinux.org, svn.archlinux.org and rsync.archlinux.org are now > on a new server which has plenty of diskspace for us to continue > packaging for a while (16T free). On the old host I had a systemd user service to populate this:

Re: [arch-dev-public] SDR package naming

[2020-06-05 15:30:54 +0100] Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public: > No consensus came from my attempt at > contacting him. And there was no discussion, it was one sided, so I > feel like this issue is not resolved. There are still relevant points > that I want to see addressed. It looks to me like

Re: [arch-dev-public] SDR package naming

[2020-06-04 23:03:23 +0100] Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public: > 1) Rename libuhd to uhd > 2) Use the gr- prefix instead of gnuradio- for GNURadio[2] blocks Your proposed changes indeed seem the correct thing to do, but Kyle appears to have done a good job maintaining those packages over the

Re: [arch-dev-public] Discussion - Increasing our CPU requirements

[2020-03-29 16:25:48 +0100] Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public: > What I would for us to do is to create a x86-64-axv2, etc. that would > complement x86-64. We would not add it as a target for all packages, > just for the ones that make sense. > > For this pacman would have to support architecture

Re: [arch-dev-public] Urgent news item: sshd needs restarting after upgrading to openssh-8.2p1

[2020-02-16 20:03:16 -0500] Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public: > It's pretty plausible that this commit is simply incompatible with the > previous version of sshd, therefore it could not reexec: > https://github.com/openssh/openssh-portable/commit/c2bd7f74b0e0f3a3ee9d19ac549e6ba89013abaf > > So

Re: [arch-dev-public] Urgent news item: sshd needs restarting after upgrading to openssh-8.2p1

[2020-02-16 19:53:53 -0500] Santiago Torres-Arias via arch-dev-public: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 07:51:19PM -0500, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public > wrote: > > On 2/16/20 7:47 PM, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I

Re: [arch-dev-public] Urgent news item: sshd needs restarting after upgrading to openssh-8.2p1

[2020-02-16 19:51:19 -0500] Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public: > On 2/16/20 7:47 PM, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > I'd like to post the following news item within the hour. > > > > > > > > Title: sshd need

[arch-dev-public] Urgent news item: sshd needs restarting after upgrading to openssh-8.2p1

Dear all, I'd like to post the following news item within the hour. Title: sshd needs restarting after upgrading to openssh-8.2p1 Conent: After upgrading to openssh-8.2p1, the existing SSH daemon will be unable to accept new connections. When upgrading remote hosts,

Re: [arch-dev-public] Guidelines for news posting

[2020-01-06 23:11:57 +0100] Sven-Hendrik Haase via arch-dev-public: > Every news post needs to have a corresponding draft submitted to > arch-dev-public and wait for feedback for at least 24 hours unless: > 1. it is urgent (and would be too late after 24 hours) > 2. it is a simple

Re: [arch-dev-public] Restricting ability to post news items

[2020-01-06 16:48:48 -0300] Giancarlo Razzolini: > I'm moving this to staff@, please stop replying on a-d-p. Doing dirty laundry > in public is not necessary. And I'm moving this back to arch-dev-public because most staff aren't concerned with posting news items. Besides, there's nothing secret

Re: [arch-dev-public] Restricting ability to post news items

[2020-01-05 21:27:19 -0300] Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public: > Em janeiro 5, 2020 21:04 Allan McRae via arch-dev-public escreveu: > > > > Do we really need to write down everything? Have we reached a point in > > the distro where common sense has stopped? Why would an announcement > >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal: Build a ruleset for new packages and package quality

[2019-12-12 13:21:42 +0100] Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public: > 1. find a consensus on rules which packages we allow in our repositories > and which don't. There's no need for hard rules except "don't put stuff in the repos that will cause legal problems". We certainly strive to ship

Re: [arch-dev-public] [arch-dev] State of OCaml-Update (stuck by deprecation of camlp4)

[2019-08-06 19:21:11 +0200] Jürgen Hötzel: > Unfortunately it is not possible to compile camlp4 with OCaml >= 4.08. > > But some well known packages depend on this preprocessor. E.g. :Haxe, > lablgtk2 (therefore also: Unison and Coq). > > I don't see that these projects will be migrated to

Re: [arch-dev-public] Away until June 17

[2019-06-07 09:54:25 +0200] Laurent Carlier via arch-dev-public: > For holidays Me too! I'll be travelling for business and pleasure from today until July 24. Though I should remain reachable by email, my response latency will probably increase and might reach 48h or so. So feel free to do

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal for a new organisation structure

[2019-06-02 06:06:35 +0200] Christian Rebischke: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 04:10:45PM -1000, Public mailing list for Arch Linux > development wrote: > Thanks for your mail. I remember now that you have told me this some > months ago. This leads to a question: Why are these types of dicussions >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal for a new organisation structure

Hi Christian, [2019-06-02 01:08:30 +0200] Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public: > inspired by the last thread about moving proprietary software to > community, our general problem of getting more people involved in Arch > Linux and the (for me) chaotic organisation structure and hierarchy I >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Spring cleaning (take 2)

[2019-03-27 18:08:02 +0100] Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public: > I would adopt: > ttf-baekmuk > ttf-hannom > ttf-khmer > ttf-sazanami > ttf-tibetan-machine I've just moved those to [community] for the greater good! Enjoy. -- Gaetan signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-dev-public] Spring cleaning (take 2)

[2019-03-27 17:19:34 +0100] Antonio Rojas via arch-dev-public: > geeqie I've adopted that one. Cheers. -- Gaetan

Re: [arch-dev-public] RFC: (devtools) Changing default compression method to zstd

[2019-03-25 00:46:15 +0100] Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public: > On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 04:39:54PM -0700, Andrew Gregory via arch-dev-public > wrote: > > I don't consider hoping that libarchive doesn't need a rebuild in the > > near future a great strategy. That being said, this is really > >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Follow-up on the “Proposal: minimal base system”

[2019-03-18 08:39:45 +0100] Bartłomiej Piotrowski via arch-dev-public: > I asked Bruno to start another round as previous thread is way too long > for people who missed the party to catch up. So some of us have taken the time to discuss this issue just a month ago but because it's too much to

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal: minimal base system

[2019-03-17 13:35:55 -1000] Gaetan Bisson: > Only 156 packages have glibc in their depends array. My bad. It's 624 packages for a total of 10.000. Cheers. -- Gaetan signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal: minimal base system

[2019-03-18 00:25:09 +0100] Alad Wenter via arch-dev-public: > Assuming we implement this group or meta-package as something of policy, i.e. > every repository package is assumed to depend on it. This would then make > base similar to base-devel, except for depends() instead of makedepends(). >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Follow-up on the “Proposal: minimal base system”

[2019-03-17 23:29:12 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > I was satisfied with the consensus we reached, but when I asked on IRC > how I should revive the thread so that we move on with that proposal to > an actual implementation, I faced concerns about this proposal from > several persons.

Re: [arch-dev-public] Follow-up on the “Proposal: minimal base system”

[2019-03-17 19:07:23 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > This is a follow-up on the last month discussion about a “minimal base > system”. Creating a new thread removed from the discussion we had a month ago just makes it so much harder for all of us to remember what everyone's arguments

Re: [arch-dev-public] A contrib repository

[2019-03-13 23:46:10 +0100] Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public: > There is a *lot* of small tools people have written over the years that > resides > in bin/ directories which could be useful for more people. We also have > several > such tools on soyuz, where sogrep was added to devtools this

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal: minimal base system

[2019-02-13 08:55:27 +1000] Allan McRae via arch-dev-public: > On 13/2/19 8:17 am, Levente Polyak via arch-dev-public wrote: > > On 2/12/19 7:16 PM, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public wrote: > >> [2019-02-12 16:40:08 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > >>> Ju

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal: minimal base system

[2019-02-12 16:40:08 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > Just in case it wasn’t clear, my answer would have been mostly the same > as Eli’s. > > So, Gaetan, Allan and Bartłomiej (or anyone else for that matter), do > you have further comments/questions regarding this, does the existence >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal: minimal base system

Bruno, We all seem to agree that [base] plays no satisfactory role in its current state, so I think Allan definitely has a point: let us first turn [base] into something useful, and only then wonder if we need something more. [2019-02-05 14:38:26 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > Le

Re: [arch-dev-public] Proposal: minimal base system

[2019-01-21 18:58:54 -0500] Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public: > On 1/21/19 6:53 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public wrote: > > I agree with this package list. It's missing mkinitcpio though. > > No it is not, mkinitcpio is definitively not needed. > > It's only required in order to

Re: [arch-dev-public] TU application process

[2018-11-06 12:13:54 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > Le 06/11/2018 à 11:37, Allan McRae a écrit : > > But because you asked my opinion, I think a TU council is > > a really, really, really bad idea. No need to set some TUs above > > others. > Well some already are, because they are

Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping KDE4 libs

[2018-09-04 14:46:15 +0200] Bruno Pagani: > Le 25/08/2018 à 01:31, Gaetan Bisson a écrit : > > [2018-08-24 18:45:33 +0200] Bruno Pagani: > >> I have a ready PKGBUILD > >> (https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/plain/PKGBUILD?h=scribus-devel) > >> that I

Re: [arch-dev-public] Improving the package guidelines

[2018-08-29 20:20:29 +0200] Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public: > The rewrites have been up for a few months now and I intend to merge them > soon. > Feel free to still review them, either with a reply on the ML or on IRC. > Whatever > you prefer :) Sorry but I don't recall such a thing ever

Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping KDE4 libs

[2018-08-24 18:45:33 +0200] Bruno Pagani: > I have a ready PKGBUILD > (https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/plain/PKGBUILD?h=scribus-devel) > that I can push (after changing the pkgname) if scribus is moved to > [community]. And we can co-maintain it there, co-maintaining is the new > sexy. ;)

Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping KDE4 libs

[2018-08-24 11:51:30 +0200] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > > scribus > > The develop branch (1.5.x), available as scribus-devel in the AUR (and > maintained by myself), is Qt5. It has been in development for the past 3 > years already, and still no ETA AFAIK… I’ve been using it instead of >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Away until Aug 17

[2018-07-27 15:43:22 +0200] Antonio Rojas via arch-dev-public: > Vacation time. Will be intermittently available via email/irc but won't do > any packaging. Same here though I might sporadically get some packaging done. Will be back full time from Sept 1 on. Cheers. -- Gaetan

Re: [arch-dev-public] Enforcing 2FA in GitHub organization

[2018-06-29 10:09:21 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski via arch-dev-public: > I want to enable mandatory two-factor authentication in our GitHub > organization. Few of you unfortunately don't use it and will be > effectively removed when I flip the switch, which I plan to do next > week, 6th July. No

Re: [arch-dev-public] New build server in the US?

[2018-04-19 21:19:43 +0200] Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public: > Some feedback on how people use soyuz would probably help a lot here. > What are your build times, how quickly do you want the result, do you > need to see live output, does the latency to the machine matter > (interactive usage?),

Re: [arch-dev-public] Windows Subsystem Linux - Arch Linux as official container?

[2018-01-29 22:00:28 +0100] Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public: > They even implemented a subsystem on Windows 10 for executing natively > ELF binaries on Windows. This system is based on docker images and some > nice guys from Microsoft have asked Allan and me if Arch Linux would be >

Re: [arch-dev-public] New dbscripts maintainer (aka: Making dbscripts great again!)

[2018-01-29 16:51:54 +0100] Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public: > Eli offered to take the lead on getting that done and also later > migrating us to git instead of svn. If there are no objections I'll help > where necessary and give him access to the dbscripts and devtools repos > in two weeks.

Re: [arch-dev-public] 2017 repository cleanup

[2017-12-18 22:20:02 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: > I’m taking it too. ;) But I can’t take tclap since it’s in extra, though > this could be easily moved to [community] since hugin is the only > package depending on it. It's just moved. Enjoy! (Note: I just did a rebuild because

Re: [arch-dev-public] 2017 repository cleanup

[2017-12-18 10:54:37 +0100] Bartłomiej Piotrowski via arch-dev-public: > - tclap: > bisson: hugin I've just orphaned hugin too. Happy adopting! :) -- Gaetan

Re: [arch-dev-public] Replace Gentoo mime-types with Fedora mailcap?

[2017-11-22 19:24:20 +] Jan Alexander Steffens via arch-dev-public: > I would like to propose replacing mime-types with mailcap from Fedora[3], > which is still maintained; it fixes the above bug. It's quite different from our current mime.types but sure let's try it. > and /etc/mailcap (not

Re: [arch-dev-public] Switching the bugtracker to Bugzilla

[2017-11-14 22:11:02 +0100] Johannes Löthberg via arch-dev-public: > My first reaction is that it'd be nice to not have a bunch of old cruft > around, For what it's worth: I completely agree. My choice would be to start over with a clean bug tracker and not migrate anything. Everyone who cares

Re: [arch-dev-public] Migrating mail server on Sunday

Hi Florian, [2017-09-02 20:33:11 +0200] Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public: > User passwords are not migrated so you will have to set the password > again on orion using `passwd`. If you have already set a password > previously but forgot it, I can remove the password for you. Can you please do

Re: [arch-dev-public] Bringing Multipath TCP kernel (linux-mptcp) to [community]

[2017-06-06 22:58:01 +0200] Baptiste Jonglez: > Since a few years, I maintain a variant of the linux kernel in the AUR [1] > that adds support for Multipath TCP [2]. The most recent version is based > on linux 4.4, and the package I maintain tries to follow the "linux" > package from [core] as

Re: [arch-dev-public] Improving overall experience for contributors

[2017-05-24 13:08:18 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski: > How long do you expect people to be happy to send their changes to > /dev/null before they give up? Because I already met some people that > are more clever than me in every packaging related area that decided to > switch to a distribution where

Re: [arch-dev-public] Improving overall experience for contributors

[2017-05-23 22:23:51 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski: > Another thing that I heard in last few months isthat it is actually hard > for potential TU candidates to find a sponsor. While I believe it is > perfectly fine to e-mail few potential sponsors to ask for opinion, > throwing random messages at

Re: [arch-dev-public] OpenSSL 1.1.0

[2017-04-22 18:05:27 +0200] Sébastien Luttringer: > When do you plan to move openssl rebuild out of testing? Quoting arojas on IRC: 2017-04-20 09:11:27 arojas: current blocker for openssl if FS#53618 2017-04-20 09:11:47 arojas: someone needs to decide whether we care about it or not, and if yes

Re: [arch-dev-public] Packages for adoption

[2017-04-18 08:53:07 +0200] Bartłomiej Piotrowski: > tcpdump > whois I've just adopted them; they can stay in [extra]. Cheers. -- Gaetan

Re: [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS (aka making AUR user names public)

[2017-03-07 09:05:28 +0100] Lukas Fleischer: > If we *really* think that we need to keep user names secret, I think we > should take down the whole AUR website because we already share this > information everywhere without explicitly telling our users we do so. Or > at least censor the user names

Re: [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS (aka making AUR user names public)

Dave, You appeared to have inserted some text in the middle of Lukas' message with no indication whatsoever which paragraphs are yours and which are his. I'm sure GMail can tell them apart but for those of us who use run-of-the-mill emails could you find a way to fix this behavior? I'm attaching

Re: [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS (aka making AUR user names public)

[2017-03-05 14:35:05 +0100] Lukas Fleischer: > My original questions was: Are we fine with sharing the list of AUR > accounts names (only user names, no real names or email addresses) with > a researcher that seems trustworthy and agrees to not share the data in > any form other than the resulting

Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping cdrkit, replacing with cdrtools

[2017-01-21 00:39:52 +0100] Jan de Groot: > Since we're dropping dead packages, I have one package remaining on the > "missing sources" todo list: cdrkit. > > Given the fact that Debian has forked an old cdrtools release, applied > some patches and then abandoned the project completely, I would

Re: [arch-dev-public] Phasing out webkitgtk{,2}

[2017-01-18 22:42:38 +] Jan Alexander Steffens via arch-dev-public: > WebkitGTK+ 2.4 has been unmaintained for quite a while, and lots of CVEs > have accumulated. The last release fixing CVEs, 2.4.10, only fixed about > half the vulnerabilities known, and that release was only made because >

Re: [arch-dev-public] [RFC] pyalpm maintainership

[2016-12-24 20:18:21 +0100] Jelle van der Waa: > I'd like to see some improvements in the maintenance of pyalpm. I'm not sure what improvements you have in mind but there's two things called pyalpm: Remy's personal git repo (projects:users/remy/pyalpm.git) and our package. I'm assuming you're

Re: [arch-dev-public] Shadowing i686, round 1

[2016-12-12 21:51:31 +0100] Bartłomiej Piotrowski: > In September we discussed upgrading the default -march value for > packages to include SSE2 (and possibly more instructions). I think the > general consensus was that we don't agree what we should do and we just > left the problem intact. > >

Re: [arch-dev-public] todo list for moving http -> https sources

[2016-11-01 09:55:11 -0400] Dave Reisner: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 04:09:40PM -1000, Gaetan Bisson wrote: > > [2016-10-31 10:05:26 -0400] Dave Reisner: > > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 04:43:04PM -1000, Gaetan Bisson wrote: > > > > I agree with Sébastien. We should e

Re: [arch-dev-public] todo list for moving http -> https sources

[2016-10-31 15:19:40 +0100] NicoHood: > I'd also vote for https. It does not hurt to use a secure channel to > download the sources from. It would be great if we as ArchLinux team > could make the first step into that direction. > > Using PGP signatures is another discussion, also the hash

Re: [arch-dev-public] todo list for moving http -> https sources

[2016-10-31 10:05:26 -0400] Dave Reisner: > On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 04:43:04PM -1000, Gaetan Bisson wrote: > > I agree with Sébastien. We should encourage upstream to digitally sign > > their releases, and verify their authenticity in our PKGBUILDs. > > > > Downloadin

Re: [arch-dev-public] todo list for moving http -> https sources

[2016-10-31 03:23:48 +0100] Sébastien Luttringer: > On Sun, 2016-10-30 at 20:55 -0400, Dave Reisner wrote: > > There's been a sizeable number of bugs filed over the past month or so > > about changin PKGBUILDs to acquire sources from https rather than http. > > Rather than continue to flood the

Re: [arch-dev-public] i686 and SSE2

[2016-09-19 20:57:01 +0200] Balló György via arch-dev-public: > 2016-09-19 15:34 GMT+02:00 Allan McRae : > > > > If we limit our choice based on your CPU, then we need to limit based on > > the other CPU mentioned in this thread. > > > > That should not be a consideration at

Re: [arch-dev-public] Long out of date packages

[2016-08-06 16:10:04 +0300] Jerome Leclanche: > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/any/firefox-firebug/ > > We shouldn't really be packaging Firefox extensions... It really makes no difference whether it's a browser extension or an ordinary piece of software: we simply shouldn't keep

Re: [arch-dev-public] Discussion about optional dependencies

[2016-07-19 11:13:22 +1000] Allan McRae: > My opinion is the primary binary for a > package should run out of the box. If you really need to reduce > dependencies, then a split package should be considered. That makes sense to me. -- Gaetan

Re: [arch-dev-public] signoffs are dead

[2016-07-01 21:24:47 +0200] Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public: > Am 2016-06-30 09:41, schrieb Johannes Löthberg via arch-dev-public: > > That has actually come up on IRC a lot of times over the last couple > > years, users asking how to sign-off packages / if they can help > > signing-off. > >

[arch-dev-public] signoffs are dead

Dear all, For a while now packages in [testing] have gotten little to no signoffs and I've been moving mine to [core] after a week without feedback. I suspect many of you have been doing this too. Here's the signoff reports over the last ten days: - June 19: 0 signoffs - June 20: 6 from me, 4

[arch-dev-public] Announcement for screen-4.4.0-1

Hi, I'll post the following announcement when screen-4.4.0-1 moves to [core]. Feedback is welcome as always. Cheers. Title: screen-4.4.0-1 unable to attach old sessions As you upgrade to screen-4.4.0-1 you will be unable to reattach sessions started with earlier screen versions. Please make

Re: [arch-dev-public] [PATCH 1/1] move initramfs generation from install script to pacman hook

[2016-05-18 08:42:49 -1000] Gaetan Bisson: > [2016-05-18 13:55:40 +0200] Christian Hesse: > > From: Christian Hesse <m...@eworm.de> > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Hesse <m...@eworm.de> > > --- > > PKGBUILD | 5 + > > linux

Re: [arch-dev-public] [PATCH 1/1] move initramfs generation from install script to pacman hook

[2016-05-18 13:55:40 +0200] Christian Hesse: > From: Christian Hesse > > Signed-off-by: Christian Hesse > --- > PKGBUILD | 5 + > linux-initramfs.hook | 11 +++ > linux.install| 4 > 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4

Re: [arch-dev-public] Conclusion: DKMS modules

[2016-04-13 02:05:13 +0200] Sébastien Luttringer: > I started promoting a way to manage o-o-t modules with only dkms. > During the discussion, providing binary modules make consensus. So, I made a > concession and moved to a position close to yours, which can be sum as, if we > provide binary

Re: [arch-dev-public] vivaldi browser in community

[2016-04-02 12:14:11 +0200] Jelle van der Waa: > On 04/01/16 at 09:17pm, Ike Devolder wrote: > > Are there any objections to bring in vivaldi browser [1] into our > > community repo once its stable is released? > > > > Vivaldi is a chromium based browser, and it is different from most other > >

Re: [arch-dev-public] Conclusion: DKMS modules

Sébastien, [2016-03-23 22:28:36 +0100] Sébastien Luttringer: > Unexpectedly we got the most feedback from persons who are not dealing > currently with the burden of managing kernels and their modules. It's been more than two weeks since Allan's original message; everybody who wanted to

Re: [arch-dev-public] Consensus: DKMS modules

[2016-03-15 19:49:25 -0400] Daniel Micay: > > To me the issue is people pushing new kernels to the repos but not > > being > > able to provide the same level of support that we have for mainline. > > Offloading out-of-tree module rebuilds to end users instead of doing > > it > > ourselves is

Re: [arch-dev-public] Consensus: DKMS modules

[2016-03-15 10:06:22 +1000] Allan McRae: > On 14/03/16 09:07, Allan McRae wrote: > > On 13/03/16 00:52, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > >> Please note that as an ideal target, I would have all our kernel modules > >> available via dkms _and_ via prebuilt modules for each kernel flavor we > >>

Re: [arch-dev-public] Master key holders response time

[2015-12-06 08:52:04 +1000] Allan McRae: > Is it time to cycle our key holders? I vote yes. It should only be natural to step down from the responsibilities one does not anymore have the time to assume. Simply because that is in the best interests of the distro. This also includes orphaning

[arch-dev-public] AFK until mid-January

Hi guys, I was diving and got bit by a moray eel. Nothing too serious but my right-hand will have to be at rest for the next few weeks. Typing is slow with my left... And then I'll go on a small road trip for the holidays. So please feel free to take care of my packages while I'm AFK, likely

Re: [arch-dev-public] [RFC] archive.archlinux.org

[2015-10-17 21:02:00 +0200] Sébastien Luttringer: > More than one year ago[1] we started to discuss making the Arch > Rollback Machine more official. There were pros and cons and I would > give us the opportunity to move forward. I think this is great. You've now been running that project

Re: [arch-dev-public] [RFC] archive.archlinux.org

[2015-10-17 21:02:00 +0200] Sébastien Luttringer: > Q: We will support old packages? > A: No. Nothing change. We already have to check when people report bugs > they upgraded their system to the last version. I note that we provide aur.archlinux.org as a service to the community, but with a big

Re: [arch-dev-public] News item for openssh-7.0p1-1

[2015-08-13 12:34:07 +0900] Gaetan Bisson: Oh, sure. Here's a new proposal: Better wording. Title: openssh-7.0p1 deprecates ssh-dss keys In light of recently discovered vulnerabilities, the new `openssh-7.0p1` release deprecates keys of `ssh-dss` type, also known as DSA keys. See

[arch-dev-public] News item for openssh-7.0p1-1

Hi, I'd like to suggest the following piece of news to be posted when openssh-7.0p1-1 lands in [core]: The new openssh-7.0p1 release deprecates certain types of SSH keys that are now considered vulnerable. For details, see the [upstream

Re: [arch-dev-public] News item for openssh-7.0p1-1

[2015-08-12 23:15:34 +0200] Christian Hesse: Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org on Thu, 2015/08/13 00:03: Hi, I'd like to suggest the following piece of news to be posted when openssh-7.0p1-1 lands in [core]: The new openssh-7.0p1 release deprecates certain types of SSH keys

Re: [arch-dev-public] News item for openssh-7.0p1-1

[2015-08-12 20:24:07 +0200] Jens Adam: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:03:59 +0900 Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org: Hi, I'd like to suggest the following piece of news to be posted when openssh-7.0p1-1 lands in [core]: The new openssh-7.0p1 release deprecates certain types of SSH keys

Re: [arch-dev-public] [core] build failures

[2015-08-12 20:42:21 +1000] Allan McRae: Failure in package(): FAIL: ldns - build failed It works for me. Do you build from trunk? -- Gaetan

Re: [arch-dev-public] Fwd: Non-core kernel

[2015-07-19 16:37:42 +0200] Jan Alexander Steffens: I recently noticed we have community/linux-grsec. Do we have a stance on additional kernels? I vaguely remember some stigma against it but not the details. Maybe I'm completely wrong. For reference, it was discussed there:

[arch-dev-public] git packages and checksums

Hi, As more of our official packages use git sources, I'd like to suggest we always enforce some kind of checksum verification. More specifically, I'd like us to avoid using straightforward source arrays such as: source=(git://github.com/systemd/systemd.git#tag=v$pkgver)

Re: [arch-dev-public] git packages and checksums

[2015-07-18 22:32:47 -0400] Dave Reisner: Tags are more explicitly published by upstreams than commit hashes. I'm not sure I understand the benefit of switching. Why is it preferrable to use the value rather than the pointer? What makes it better? The commit hash is a checksum that ensures the

Re: [arch-dev-public] git packages and checksums

[2015-07-19 06:52:39 +0200] Jerome Leclanche: git tags can and should be pgp-signed, especially if the upstream is relying purely on git for releases. Is any package not covered by that? That would certainly be the ideal way of doing things but I don't believe pacman currently knows how to

Re: [arch-dev-public] git packages and checksums

[2015-07-18 15:13:43 -0700] Anatol Pomozov: On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org wrote: Instead I suggest we use the full commit hash. In the example above, that'd become something like: _commit=9a50ce20ef60263a6c88c29470ce761fcc424f2d

Re: [arch-dev-public] Packages added to todo list 'Perl 5.22'

[2015-06-02 21:17:03 +0200] Florian Pritz: On 02.06.2015 19:47, Gaetan Bisson wrote: What if I want perl to be in optdepends, not depends? Even if it is possible to put a versioned entry in optdeps (I don't know), it wouldn't help really because pacman doesn't actually check those. Just

Re: [arch-dev-public] Packages added to todo list 'Perl 5.22'

[2015-06-02 08:10:43 -] Arch Website Notification: Todo list information: Name: Perl 5.22 URL: https://www.archlinux.org/todo/perl-522/ Creator: Florian Pritz Description: Include the following line at the end (inside) of each package() function: # template input;

[arch-dev-public] Merging UID/GID database into filesystem

Dear all, Following up on the User/Group management TODO list [1], I'd like to merge the users and group from the UID/GID Database [2] into the passwd and group files our filesystem package provides. [1] https://www.archlinux.org/todo/usergroup-management/ [2]

Re: [arch-dev-public] Packages added to todo list 'Fix source file names'

[2015-03-02 15:58:37 -] Arch Website Notification: Todo list information: Name: Fix source file names URL: https://www.archlinux.org/todo/fix-source-file-names/ Creator: Sergej Pupykin Description: Following packages have potential file name conflicts if you use SRCDEST in makepkg.conf.

Re: [arch-dev-public] Packages added to todo list 'Fix source file names'

[2015-03-02 12:28:46 -0500] Dave Reisner: On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 06:49:13AM -1000, Gaetan Bisson wrote: If upstream's tarball is called v0.4.1.tar.gz then I'd rather not override that... Not sure you've presented any reasoning here other than I'm lazy. Don't worry, I'm with you

Re: [arch-dev-public] Packages added to todo list 'Fix source file names'

[2015-03-02 12:54:56 -0600] Dan McGee: Future plans aside, there are 19 packages involved here. We can spend time proposing alternate solutions without patches and complaining, or we could just fix these packages. I'd rather write a patch myself than see tiny workarounds pile up in our

[arch-dev-public] Away until Feb 20

Hi guys, I'll have no Internet access for the next five days. Feel free to deal as you see fit with my packages. Cheers. -- Gaetan

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >