On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:27:04 -0400
> Genes MailLists wrote:
>
>> On 07/12/2012 04:35 PM, Cody Maloney wrote:
>> > I just managed to hit it on one of my arch boxes:
>> >
>> > (24/26) upgrading util-linux
>> >
>> >
>> > [#
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:27:04 -0400
Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/12/2012 04:35 PM, Cody Maloney wrote:
> > I just managed to hit it on one of my arch boxes:
> >
> > (24/26) upgrading util-linux
> >
> >
> > [#
On 07/12/2012 04:35 PM, Cody Maloney wrote:
> I just managed to hit it on one of my arch boxes:
>
> (24/26) upgrading util-linux
>
>
> []
> 100%
> rmdir: failed to remove ‘/var/lib/hwclock’: No such file or
On 12 July 2012 21:42, rafael ff1 wrote:
> 2012/7/12 Mateusz Loskot :
>>
>> I have been trying to install the AfterShot Pro from AUR packages,
>> full story is here [1]. It uses RPM-packaged i386 binaries.
>>
>> Because I run Arch 64-bit, I'd prefer to install 64-bit binaries,
>> but those are ava
2012/7/12 Mateusz Loskot :
> Hi,
>
> I have been trying to install the AfterShot Pro from AUR packages,
> full story is here [1]. It uses RPM-packaged i386 binaries.
>
> Because I run Arch 64-bit, I'd prefer to install 64-bit binaries,
> but those are available as Linux Debian (64-bit) deb package
I just managed to hit it on one of my arch boxes:
(24/26) upgrading util-linux
[]
100%
rmdir: failed to remove ‘/var/lib/hwclock’: No such file or directory
error: command failed to execute correctly
Cody
Hi,
I have been trying to install the AfterShot Pro from AUR packages,
full story is here [1]. It uses RPM-packaged i386 binaries.
Because I run Arch 64-bit, I'd prefer to install 64-bit binaries,
but those are available as Linux Debian (64-bit) deb package [2]
I've been trying to find out how t
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Diogo Sousa wrote:
> I was unable to find any information regarding the Arch's policy on the
> LTS kernel, specifically, what determines when the current lts version
> is replaced by the next lts version?
As Thomas said, I don't think anything has been formally de
Am 12.07.2012 18:02, schrieb Diogo Sousa:
> Hi,
>
> I was unable to find any information regarding the Arch's policy on the
> LTS kernel, specifically, what determines when the current lts version
> is replaced by the next lts version?
I don't think there is a written policy, but: In the past, we
Hi,
I was unable to find any information regarding the Arch's policy on the
LTS kernel, specifically, what determines when the current lts version
is replaced by the next lts version?
Thank you,
Diogo Sousa
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Am 12.07.2012 17:34, schrieb andrea crotti:
> Ok thanks, I'm trying now but the vanilla kernel doesn't compile.
> Looking around in the forum it appears to be the gcc version too new
> and I'm installing gcc 4.5, let's see if I get it working..
Did you use the latest version (as in: 2.6.32.59)?
Ok thanks, I'm trying now but the vanilla kernel doesn't compile.
Looking around in the forum it appears to be the gcc version too new
and I'm installing gcc 4.5, let's see if I get it working..
Otherwise another option might be to install from an old arch
installer, but then I have the same probl
Am 12.07.2012 17:09, schrieb andrea crotti:
> Yes sorry you said that, but I meant this
> Depends On : linux-api-headers>=3.4 tzdata
>
> can the linux-api-headers be a different version of the running kernel?
Of course. In fact, you must not change the headers unless you plan to
bootstrap a
2012/7/12 Thomas Bächler :
> Am 12.07.2012 16:38, schrieb andrea crotti:
>> I need 2.6.32 so it might still work..
>> The glibc for example though requires linux3 kernel apparently
>
> No, the glibc requires 2.6.32 (didn't I just say that?):
>
> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:11:51PM +0100, andrea crotti wrote:
> I would like to create multiple arch linux installations with a
> specific (a quite old 2.6 version) kernel version.
> Is that in theory possible/easy?
>
> I have a new one recently created but the downport doesn't seem so
> easy, so
Am 12.07.2012 16:38, schrieb andrea crotti:
> I need 2.6.32 so it might still work..
> The glibc for example though requires linux3 kernel apparently
No, the glibc requires 2.6.32 (didn't I just say that?):
https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/glibc#
I need 2.6.32 so it might still work..
The glibc for example though requires linux3 kernel apparently, if I
just recompile the kernel will it still work fine?
Am 12.07.2012 16:11, schrieb andrea crotti:
> I would like to create multiple arch linux installations with a
> specific (a quite old 2.6 version) kernel version.
> Is that in theory possible/easy?
>
> I have a new one recently created but the downport doesn't seem so
> easy, so maybe it would jus
I would like to create multiple arch linux installations with a
specific (a quite old 2.6 version) kernel version.
Is that in theory possible/easy?
I have a new one recently created but the downport doesn't seem so
easy, so maybe it would just be easier to start with an older one,
any suggestions?
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 7:21 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> However PAM, also by design, works in stacks, and thus offers a reasonable
> solution -- update the `auth` and `password` PAM keys to the new algo (so
> new passwords are read/written properly) then duplicate the `auth` key,
> restore th
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:06 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 12/07/12 10:55, Allan McRae wrote:
> For comments:
> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:usrlib
I took the liberty to edit that page to change the command to confirm
if the update worked, from
> ls -l /
to
> ls -ld /lib
T
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>
> When upgrading to a stronger hash I have never tested if it stops you
> from using the same password when the hashes are different because it
> matches both but I expect, that would be how it works. Is that the
> issue? In that usually you
> It does. But is is still two steps. This isn't really a problem
> though, just out of curiosity.
Fair enough.
I don't understand the reason to want to do this, am I missing
something aside from why should the system stop you when it could just
warn you (similar to requirements for root).
When
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Gour wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:31:59 -0500
> C Anthony Risinger wrote:
>
>> i would recommend dropping the subvols ASAP, and reviewing the
>> original wiki linked above.
>
> Hmm...at the moment I use RAID-1 - 1 RAID partition for /boot
> (ext2), another for
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
>
> Does passwd -d work.
>
It does. But is is still two steps. This isn't really a problem
though, just out of curiosity.
--Chris Sakalis
> I do not think that this is what Nemo is asking. If you try to set
> your password to the same one you already have, passwd fails with
> "Password unchanged" and asks you again for a new password. So, if you
> just want to update your hashes, you have to choose an intermediate
> temporary passwor
26 matches
Mail list logo
