[arch-dev-public] kernel headers in a separate package

Apparently it's taken me 2 months to notice this because I've been building my own kernel, but I'll ask anyway... The kernel headers required to build kernel modules have been put in a separate package "kernel26-headers". We don't separate dev headers for anything else - why is this different? Sec

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg v2.5.4

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:32 +0100, "Thomas Bächler" wrote: > Am 21.02.2010 14:31, schrieb James Rayner: > > Mostly bugfixes and some minor features that are isolated or trivial > > > > netcfg v2.5.4 > > - Bridge connection example > > - Add simple bridg

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] wpa_actiond 1.1-1

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:32 +0100, "Thomas Bächler" wrote: > Am 22.02.2010 05:15, schrieb Eric Bélanger: > > you forgot to put the source on ftp. > > > > And now I was so sure I did it. Fixed. > Works for me, signoff i686

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg v2.5.4

Mostly bugfixes and some minor features that are isolated or trivial netcfg v2.5.4 - Bridge connection example - Add simple bridging support - Add adjustable netmask to IP='static' netcfg v2.5.3 - Add missing include. FS#18411 - Fix FS#18391, FS#18385, broken rfkill, handle hard rfkill situations

[arch-dev-public] netcfg & away 8/2 to 15/2

Hi all, Just letting you know I'm away for the next week. I'll move netcfg testing->core when I return so that I am about to offer support/explanation/docs. Thanks to those who have closed some of my bugs/updated my packages. I'm sorry that I can't spend more time around helping and keeping track

Re: [arch-dev-public] [arch-dev] [signoff] netcfg v2.5.1

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 11:34 +1100, "James Rayner" wrote: > new netcfg in [testing] ready for signoff. > > > Also, news item for the release follows below: > > netcfg v2.5.1 > > This release brings a completely new auto wireless/wired configuration. > The old

Re: [arch-dev-public] rfkill package

On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:57 +0100, "Thomas Bächler" wrote: > I noticed that the rfkill package is in community now (very good). > However, I have been asked if it was possible to make a few improvements: > > 1) Add a rfkill group (or use an existing group) and allow that group to > write /dev/rfkil

[arch-dev-public] Away for 3/1-10/1

Hello all, I'm away from the 3/1 to 10/1, though will be briefly back in town for the 7th and 8th due to work. There shouldn't be problems, my very few packages are up to date and netcfg is quiet. I've released rc2 but it's only bug fixes and I'm around the next couple of days in case I need to

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

> 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. Opensource softwa

Re: [arch-dev-public] [gnome-system-tools] move to extra

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 12:43:25AM +0200, Ionut Biru wrote: > hi, > i want to move $subject to extra to have a complete gnome desktop. > this package brings two additional dependency, liboobs and > system-tools-backends. > > what to you think? > I don't like the idea. I don't think we need the G

Re: [arch-dev-public] New core package: wpa_actiond

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Pierre Schmitz schrieb: >> >> Am Sonntag 27 September 2009 16:01:38 schrieb Thomas Bächler: >>> >>> Package is in testing for review. >> >> How should we test this? Will there be a new netcfg soon? Why not include >> iths in netcfg or might

Re: [arch-dev-public] GNOME 2.28 roadmap

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Jan de Groot wrote: > At this moment we have a gnome-unstable repository, containing GNOME > 2.28.0. This repository should be used on top of testing, though I'm > working on it to make it compatible with just extra. > > Todo: > - Compile packages against extra depe

Re: [arch-dev-public] Cleaning up base (FS#12890)

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Roman Kyrylych wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 09:39, Allan McRae wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> FS#12890 (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/12890) suggests we clean up some >> crud from the base group. >> I started a wiki page back in July to look at doing this >> (http:/

Re: [arch-dev-public] Enable KMS by default for radeon and intel?

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Andrea Scarpino wrote: > On 11/09/2009, Tobias Powalowski wrote: >> HI guys, >> Shall i enable kms switch on per default on next .31 rebuild? >> Radeon will not work without this switch. >> Intel seems stable? >> Jan or anyone else any input on this? > I am using

Re: [arch-dev-public] Mirrors supporting rsync

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:47 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote: > Below is a list of our current mirrors that support rsync. I would > like to begin the process of setting up Tiered mirroring to give > gerolde some breathing room. > > Mirrors supporting rsync: 26 >        aarnet.edu.au >        iinet.net.au >

Re: [arch-dev-public] remove pear from php package?

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote: > Hi all, > > I just wondered if we should just remove pear from our php package. Pear is a > package manager for php and as such bypasses pacman. Using pear is not a great > idea imho; you might have conflicts on php updates and files that are

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg v2.2.1

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 12:55 PM, James Rayner wrote: > Another netcfg release, details on bbs: > http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=74887 > > Signoff i686 > Anyone? If you're using the 2.2.0 beta3, it's identical except 2 one liners and signoff on that would suffice too.

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg v2.2.1

Another netcfg release, details on bbs: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=74887 Signoff i686

Re: [arch-dev-public] What is man-db and why is it so crappy?

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote: > On Thursday 18 June 2009 09:36:53 Thomas Bächler wrote: >> man-db runs a cronjob daily. Every time this cronjob runs, it causes >> very high system load for about 5 minutes (this is longer than >> updatedb). Does it really have to run daily?

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.30-2

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Tobias Powalowski wrote: > Arch Linux changes: > - removed snd-pcspkr module #14958 > - changed to lzma kernel compression > - removed dsdt patch, it doesn't work anymore, probably we can remove it >  forever. Please shout out loud, if you really need this! > - remo

[arch-dev-public] Away 6th June - 24th June

I've got exams over the next month, so I won't have much time to spend on Arch. I'll still be checking my email, so if netcfg or anything asplodes you can still contact me. James

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] dhcpcd 5.0.4-1

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Ronald van Haren wrote: > Hi. > > dhcpcd 5.0.4-1 is in testing for both architectures. please signoff. > > - bump to latest version > - remove upstream patch which is now in this version > Signoff i686

[arch-dev-public] [PATCH] Start sequences of daemons in background

improvement with wireless, as it takes longer and can be backgrounded with the patch. From d7bf042dfef70ec5453609488fdde11f78603323 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: James Rayner Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 11:26:11 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] Option to start groups of daemons sequentially in background,

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] dhcpcd 5.0.2-1

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Ronald van Haren wrote: > Hi, > > Please signoff dhcpcd 5.0.2-1 for both architectures. > > Apart from an upstream update it contains a patch which fixes a > segfault quite a few people seem to experience (FS#14675) [1] so a > quick signoff would be appreciated. >

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] dhcpcd 5.0.1-1

On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Ronald van Haren wrote: > Hi, > > please signoff for both architectures. > > James tested netcfg2 for compatibility and all should be fine on that end. > This release probably also fixes http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/11761 > but I have no way to verify it so I won'

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] mlocate-0.22-1

Only minor fixes: https://fedorahosted.org/mlocate/browser/NEWS?rev=mlocate-0.22 Signoff x86_64 and i686

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] ipw2100-fw 1.3-3

On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Eric Bélanger wrote: > On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Eric Bélanger wrote: >> On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote: >>> Am Samstag, 2. Mai 2009 07:39:07 schrieb Eric Bélanger: I don't use this so 2 signoffs are needed. >>> >>> That could take

Re: [arch-dev-public] Resigning

On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Tom K wrote: > Hi all. > > The practical effect of this message is precisely nothing, as I have been > inactive for quite a while now. For the last few months, real life has been > increasingly demanding, but I was hoping I would find a way to accommodate > Arch ac

Re: [arch-dev-public] python-mpdclient to community/unsupported?

On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Daenyth Blank wrote: > On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 07:36, Andrea Scarpino wrote: >> Hi DEV, >> I think we could move python-mpdclient to unsupported (or community if >> a TU is interested). >> >> This because py-libmpdclient is deprecated[1], and we have python-mpd >

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg 2.1.3-3

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Thomas Bächler schrieb: >> >> James commited this, but never pushed it to the repos. This fixes the >> problem mentioned here, please sign off: >> >> http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2009-March/010929.html > > Okay, I forgot

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] wpa_supplicant 0.6.9

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > James Rayner schrieb: >>>> >>>> It does work, but netcfg complains about: >>>> >>>> chmod: cannot access `/tmp/wpa.wlan': No such file or directory >>>> >>> I thoug

Re: [arch-dev-public] our FAT support and Microsoft

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 1:44 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote: > > I was thinking similarly - suddenly suing all these companies that use > FAT32 is going to backfire and some government somewhere is going to > get pissed about what it means for end users. > And they backed down from Tom Tom too. There is

Re: [arch-dev-public] WTF? i686 support?

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 1. April 2009 05:20:37 schrieb Aaron Griffin: >> I specifically told you guys that we were NOT dropping the i686 port, >> and you guys went and voted on it without me? This is the last straw. >> If you guys don't fix this now, c

Re: [arch-dev-public] x86_64 machines for Arch devs

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Dusty Phillips wrote: > Hey guys, > > I know we all agreed to drop i686 support, but it leaves me with a > small problem -- I'm one of the few devs not yet blessed with a 64 bit > machine. I was thinking maybe we could use the donation funding to buy > x86_64 build

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] wpa_supplicant 0.6.9

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 4:07 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Pierre Schmitz schrieb: >> >> Am Sonntag 29 März 2009 16:54:45 schrieb Thomas Bächler: >>> >>> Upstream update, please sign off. >>> >>> Also confirm that the latest testing/netcfg works with this, so we can >>> move them both soon. >> >> It

Re: [arch-dev-public] new vi/vim/gvim

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Tobias Kieslich wrote: >> >> Has anything been decided with this?  Apparently vim needs a patch to >> build against the latest ruby which I was going to attempt updating soon. > > I'm just trying to give it a whirl on a testing box. The main issue is > that the old

[arch-dev-public] -any arch support

I was wondering, what still needs to implemented to support a -any architecture repo, or if there was any intention to do this. Pacman seems happy to use -any packages. James

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] wpa_supplicant 0.6.8-1

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Tobias Powalowski wrote: >> >> So what's going on here? Can we move this? Does netcfg work now? > netcfg gives me errors while booting, with /tmp/wpa.ath0 no acess, but it does > work afterwards netcfg was chmod'ing the wpa_supplicant config file before it was cre

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] wpa_supplicant 0.6.8-1

On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote: >> > > I can't even find it in git. Just look where wpa_supplicant is called in > netcfg, it says "-wB" somewhere, replace that with "-B". It's not in [testing] because I forgot to run the db script _again_ oops.

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] wpa_supplicant 0.6.8-1

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 7:06 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > > Pierre noted that this version removes the "-w" option and thus breaks > netcfg. We need to patch netcfg to not use the -w option. James, can you put > an updated version to testing? Done. Pushed 2.1.3, it's just 2.1.2 with only minor cha

[arch-dev-public] ifconfig/route to iproute2

Bug report: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10160 Attached is a patch for initscripts git, updated from the bug report. netcfg has support in git. Remaining notes: - ip is presently located in /usr/sbin. This may be an issue. - ip appears to not need any special arguments for ipv6, so ipv6 check

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] mlocate 0.21.1

Should work fine, just a translation and manpage update. Signoff i686

Re: [arch-dev-public] *PING*

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 3:05 AM, Travis Willard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Thayer Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Updated my mailman subscription...can anybody hear me? >> > > Nope. Clearly your tubes are broken. > > (on another note, I just realized that m

Re: [arch-dev-public] delete apmd from extra?

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 5:35 PM, James Rayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Thayer Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Oct 16, 2008 at 01:41

Re: [arch-dev-public] delete apmd from extra?

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Thayer Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Oct 16, 2008 at 01:41 PM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Does anyone even use apm anymore? And if they do, shouldn't we discourage it? > > I'm sure someone in the wild is using it, but yes we should discou

Re: [arch-dev-public] xorg move to extra?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 12:05 AM, Jan de Groot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would like to move xorg to extra soon. The state of X.org in testing > is a lot better than the packages in extra. This means problems for some > users though: > > - nvidia-96xx doesn't work > - nvidia-71xx doesn't work >

[arch-dev-public] Absent till 15 November

Hey, I'm out of action until the 15th of November at least. I've got exams approaching next month and a few assignments to finish as well. netcfg in [testing] is all signed off and ready to move, though it's waiting on dhcpcd 4.x Cheers James

Re: [arch-dev-public] request for dbus in core

On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Jan de Groot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A while ago I got a request from Thomas to make a stripped down dbus > package that does not depend on libx11 so he could use it for > wpa_supplicant which is also in core. > As more and more services start to interact with

Re: [arch-dev-public] Arch Projects Page

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Dusty Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey guys, > > Have a look here: > > http://www.archlinux.org/projects/ > > Aren't all those projects except the last one old/outdated/no longer > maintained? Should I drop the from the list and start encouraging the > com

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg 2.1.2

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 6:21 AM, Phil Dillon-Thiselton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/10/4 James Rayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Trivial fixes to do with dhcp and dns >> >> - Adjusted arguments for dhcpcd 4.x >> - Restored dhcpcd as default dhcp

Re: [arch-dev-public] [idea] Kernel Release Policy

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Jud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Devs, > > > So my major point is: The only thing I want to really change is while > the newer .x kernel is been prepped for released, Arch does not abandon > the current .x kernel. Whoa, could have said that at the start :p The

Re: [arch-dev-public] draft klibc move news item

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Jud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Oct 05, 2008 at 08:37 PM, Allan McRae >> wrote: "rm /usr/lib/klibc/include/asm" > > Needed to be done as super-user? I would assume that a good percentage > of users would struggle first-time around. The users aren't children.

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] dhcpcd 4.0.1-5

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Eduardo Romero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ronald van Haren wrote: >> >> please signoff for both archs >> >> Ronald >> > > Yeah, everything is working fine, I can surf the Internet, yay!!!, so > signoff i686. > > Please don't go taking advices from Allan, that is w

Re: [arch-dev-public] Plan for python upgrade

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Eric Belanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMO, Plan 1 is the way to go as this is how we managed the qt3/qt upgrade. > > Does anyone has an idea on how many packages in the repo currently works > with or need python3.0? If that number is zero or very small, we coul

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg 2.1.2

Trivial fixes to do with dhcp and dns - Adjusted arguments for dhcpcd 4.x - Restored dhcpcd as default dhcp client - Added DNS=() array option Signoff i686 and x86_64

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] initscripts 2008.09-1

On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Roman Kyrylych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/9/25 Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 7:55 AM, Roman Kyrylych >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> The following patch fixes small issue. >>> I tried to push it but got: >>> $ git push >>> fa

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] libevent 1.4.8-2

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:51 AM, James Rayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Signoff i686, x86_64 > > Oops, that signoff was for dhcpcd.. off by one error :)

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] libevent 1.4.8-2

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:30 AM, Ronald van Haren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > please signoff for both archs Signoff i686, x86_64 note: Works fine with netcfg and rc.d/network, still takes the same arguments and has same behaviour. Only change is it's more verbose by default. This is only aesthet

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg v2.1.1

Just an embarrassing one liner that explains a lot of dhcp problems that puzzled me.

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] netcfg v2.1

Been sitting in there a while, the current RC that's in testing will be the final release. Just need another x86_64 signoff and i'll move it. Then I can get on with 2.2...

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] mlocate 0.21

Built for both x86_64 and 686, in [testing].

[arch-dev-public] Orphaning wicd

I adopted wicd a few weeks ago, though probably shouldn't have. I havn't had a chance to familiarise myself with it, nor do I use it myself, so I'm probably not the best maintainer. If there's anyone who actually uses wicd and would like to maintain it, it's all yours. There's an updated PKGBUILD

Re: [arch-dev-public] Wine association, waht should we do?

On 8/29/08, Jeff Mickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whoa. > > I just want to make my opinion known that in NO WAY should we be > modifying packages so that if users turn on an AutoRun the package > doesn't run. You turn on some kind of AutoRun feature, you deal with > the consequences. Not to me

Re: [arch-dev-public] Risky business: udev upgrade

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So I've let udev stagnate for a while, mostly because I'm a fool and > real life has given me a lack of time for anything serious in > Arch-land. > > Anyway, I've rebuilt udev 126 (we're on 119, eek!) and made what > change

Re: [arch-dev-public] Signoffs on simple version bumps (was: [signoff] man-pages 3.08-1)

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, I thought about this in the beginning, but it's easier to make a > blanket rule than to start adding exceptions. > > I'm interested in hearing opinions on this. > Maybe just common sense while erring on the side o

[arch-dev-public] iphitus.org & email down for a little while

I confused Dreamhost's DNS management web ui rather badly so it's gone and dropped iphitus.org and all subdomains from DNS. So my email (receiving at least) and other iphitus.org stuff will be offline until dreamhost sort it out and the DNS propagates again. In the meantime, my [EMAIL PROTECTED]'

Re: [arch-dev-public] Er.... ArchCon

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Dusty Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey all, > > Is there still an active/interested group of people working on or > planning an ArchCon? I'd like to join the discussion, or if its died > out completely, renew/spearhead the next generation of discussion. Is

Re: [arch-dev-public] 2008.08 ISO Release

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Simo Leone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With the new kernel in testing, it's time to start gearing up for a > release that will likely include the .1 or .2 kernel from this series. > Were there any big issues besides base package selection that anyone > noticed, or

Re: [arch-dev-public] Please stop the install message insanity

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Dan McGee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wow, I got blasted today with an 88 package upgrade on one of my > machines, and this one really stuck out: > http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/lighttpd/trunk/lighttpd.install?revision=4866&view=markup > > I don't even kno

Re: [arch-dev-public] two patches for rc.d/network

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:15 PM, James Rayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1) 0001-add-some-useful-error-messages-to-wireless-code.patch > 2) 0002-Added-connection-state-info-to-rc.d-network.patch > (patches are not dependent) Do all devs have full commit access to all of project

[arch-dev-public] two patches for rc.d/network

1) 0001-add-some-useful-error-messages-to-wireless-code.patch Makes the wireless code in rc.d/network output some useful errors and a tad more robust, rather than failing and giving no useful error at all. Not tested yet, I don't have an insecure or WEP network to try it on, and the family won't

Re: [arch-dev-public] Send my laptop for repairs

On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 3:57 AM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey guys, > Just a heads-up. My thinkpad's keyboard is acting up, so I'm sending > it in for repairs. I haven't been able to use it properly for some > time (I can't even properly login because some keys output multiple > l

Re: [arch-dev-public] Absense

On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Travis Willard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As mentioned before, I'm outta here for two weeks - be back Monday the > 23rd. I didn't get the package-updating blitz I planned done - > pre-vacation planning was too busy. :( > > Take care guys. Don't burn down the hou

Re: [arch-dev-public] European Store

On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey guys, > Daniel and I have talked about this off and on, but because someone > yelled at me over jabber, I am bringing it up here. > > Daniel is testing out European schwag stores, so some of you can get > stuff over ther

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] mlocate 0.20-2

Version 0.18 -> 0.20 Closed: FS#9977 FS#10224 Signoff x86_64 and x86 from me.

Re: [arch-dev-public] GPL Compliance: A beginning

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Thayer Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/21/08, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> However, now that you mentioned swt, it brings up a good point. We >> can't do this for things like flashplugin just yet. So, should I >> create some sort of list

[arch-dev-public] New url for blog/homepage

Everything's at iphitus.org now... http://iphitus.org The feed is now: http://iphitus.wordpress.com/feed/ Would someone be able to update the Planet to reflect this? Cheers! James

Re: [arch-dev-public] Apologies for being largely absent

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Thayer Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Apr 28, 2008 10:09 PM PDT, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I just wanted to apologize to you all for doing so little recently. > > There are lots of things I keep promising, but I'm in the process of >

Re: [arch-dev-public] The /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/updates directory - and how great it is

Awesome. +1

Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26-2.6.24.3-6

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Dan McGee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 3:40 AM, Pierre Schmitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 26. März 2008 08:38:27 schrieb Tobias Powalowski: > > > > > can we start signoff for this now? > > > > signed-off (both arches)

Re: [arch-dev-public] repo cleanup: step 2

On Wed, January 30, 2008 17:08, Eric Belanger wrote: > mlocate mine. oops.

Re: [arch-dev-public] Kernel framebuffer logo

On Fri, January 25, 2008 20:06, Damir Perisa wrote: > hi Thayer, > > Friday 25 January 2008, Thayer Williams wrote: > | My method for making the kernel logo: > |   1. Extract a png from the svg sources > |   2. Resize and optimize the colour depth with GIMP/Fireworks > |   3. Use pngtopnm (a

Re: [arch-dev-public] What not to do when packaging (vbetool)

On Sun, December 30, 2007 07:02, Dan McGee wrote: > Problem here: > > > There are about 4 revisions in a row of this, and none of them had a > pkgrel bump. Our dbscripts suck, but it looks like t