On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Alper Kanat wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As I wrote earlier, I don't have a mouse interface at all since I'm
> accessing the Arch box via SSH on my Mac. I checked the entropy level via
> cat /proc/sys/kernel/random/entropy_level and it was around 58 at most. So
> I
> inst
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Alper Kanat wrote:
> Hey There,
>
> I have an Arch Linux box inside Virtualbox on a Mac that I use for
> development purposes. I connect to this machine via SSH without any visual
> interface. It's on [testing] and just upgraded to pacman 4.0 and after
> installat
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 01:56:58PM -0600, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > I mentioned that I consider tcp_wrappers to be a DAC, someone asked me to
> > clarify on MAC and DAC systems, so I put up a blog post:
> >
> >
&
I mentioned that I consider tcp_wrappers to be a DAC, someone asked me to
clarify on MAC and DAC systems, so I put up a blog post:
http://red45.wordpress.com/2011/07/17/mac-and-dac-core-security-concepts/
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 16.07.2011 23:00, schrieb Richard Ullger:
> > What do the devs intend to do with packages that depend on tcp_wrapper
> > such as syslog-ng, xinetd and esound which is a dependency of gstreamer?
> >
> > Richard.
>
> None of those depends o
rules are constructed
and parsed it is an easy and manageable solution.
Thanks to the Arch devs for taking this out, this was the right move and I
will argue that it has made Arch more secure by not supporting outdated
security constructs.
-Thomas S Hatch
>
>
> I would say the same, but a todo list isn't a to-done list, so keep
> that in mind. He also pointed out that I got little to no feedback
> when I asked about this both a year and six months ago, so
> expectations are pretty low this time around. I'm sure if there were
> serious objections peo
>
>
> I also agree with this, but I wanted to avoid saying it lest we get into
> another debate about systemd on here. But yes, systemd does seem to go
> against
> the grain of the UNIX Philosophy and the Arch Way.
>
I agree, no need to flame, we have flamed before on this :)
In the end, I trust
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2011 05:33:50 PM Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:01 AM, Dan McGee wrote:
> > > Please welcome Dave to our development team. He has been a frequent
> > > contributor (and reviewer of patches!) to Pacman, has
Does netcfg still need net-tools? or can it be an opt depends? It was my
understanding that it only used ip unless specified otherwise.
.
The release announcement is here:
http://red45.wordpress.com/2011/05/30/salt-0-8-8/
Arch package is here:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47512
Video explaining how to use Salt and what it is in detail is here:
http://blip.tv/thomas-s-hatch/salt-0-8-7-presentation-5180182
And the
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 10:20:46 Bernardo Barros wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > There are rumors that the next version number of the Linux Kernel is
> > going to be 3.0.
> > Since we choosed 'kernel26' as the package name, we will have to
> >
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 05:20 PM, Bernardo Barros wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> There are rumors that the next version number of the Linux Kernel is
>> going to be 3.0.
>> Since we choosed 'kernel26' as the package name, we will have to
>> modify it
stem
recovery.
I have been using the rc scripts for the display managers for over 6 years
and NEVER had a problem with them. I would hate to see them leave because
some users did not know how to boot into an alternative runlevel.
-Thomas S Hatch
a mess of things sometimes :)
-Thomas S Hatch
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Brandon Jones wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Brandon Jones > >wrote:
> >
> > > I think I'll start with the AUR. I could use the packaging experience
>
hough
> once I feel skilled enough to do so.
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Brandon Jones > >wrote:
> >
> > > Alright thanks. I'll look into how pkgbuild works and see if I can
> >
ask around and
find something thats suits your fancy, I for one could always use more help
on my projects, salt, varch, quarters, butter etc:
https://github.com/thatch45
Pick your poison, but the quickest way to become a member of the Arch
developer community is to maintain packages in the AUR, kill some bugs on
the bugtracker, and submit patches to Arch projects. Then we will make you a
TU and you will be well on your way!
-Thomas S Hatch
-Arch Linux Trusted User
2011/5/1 Cédric Girard
> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Seblu wrote:
>
> > What about create a association elsewhere in the world where it can be
> > less expensive?
> >
> > In France, we have an "association law 1901"
> > (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_loi_de_1901) which allow a
> >
he Linux Kernel Foundation years
to get it, even though I would argue that Linux definitely helps children).
But another organization format will almost certainly be cheaper (most legal
business entities in the USA can be formed for less than $50) and most of
what 501(c)3 buys you is letting your donors declare the donation to be tax
exempt.
-Thomas S Hatch
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Thursday, April 21, 2011 01:48:04 Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> > On 21.04.2011 08:32, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David C. Rankin <
> > >
> > > drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On 04/06/2011 10:34
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Saturday, April 09, 2011 12:54:23 Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> > > On Saturday, April 09, 2011 12:01:04 Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Saturday, April 09, 2011 12:01:04 Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> > > On Friday, April 08, 2011 14:29:34 Heiko Baums wrote:
> > > > Am Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:55:16
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Friday, April 08, 2011 14:29:34 Heiko Baums wrote:
> > Am Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:55:16 -0600
> >
> > schrieb Thomas S Hatch :
> > > Yaro makes many good points, I think that my recommendation would
> be
&
es/selinux-pam/PKGBUILD
>>
>
> Hmm... I thought it was a a patch. Was it declared unstable/unsupported
> upstream then? There was something weird like that.
>
> Anyway, I still see nothing wrong with creating SELinux packages and having
> them available in [community], although I would like to see a separate repo
> at least for the start.
>
> Allan
>
>
If thats the case, then I will look into working with Nicky726 (The
maintainer of the SELinux packages in the AUR) and find a home for a third
party SELinux repo.
-Thomas S Hatch
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Yaro Kasear wrote:
> On Friday, April 08, 2011 05:43:51 Kaiting Chen wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Jelle van der Waa
> wrote:
> > > And on a side note, I don't like archlinux forcing users to use SELinux
> > > because users should have a choice to us
ound like a madman on a soapbox screaming SELinux,
and I had no intention to start this discussion when I mentioned this
passively in the crazy cron thread :). But since it hit a nerve, I might as
well comment :)
-Thomas S Hatch
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 08/04/11 07:16, Heiko Baums wrote:
>
>> But let's try to get objective again.
>>
>
> No need. A new cron for [core] has to pass only one condition... :)
>
> 1) a developer is willing to maintain it.
>
> So far that seems to be Thomas and
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 1:33 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:16:46 +0200
> Heiko Baums wrote:
>
> > On the other hand this issue could be solved in a different way
> > without any further discussions. There's a need for installing one
> > cron daemon, but no need for a default
> cronie also appears to be the nicest migration choice for users who are
> not used to fcron. It seems to support anachron features, cron.d,
> daily/weekly/etc, is able to actually keep time and works just like
> expected whereas fcron has fcrontab with a slightly different syntax. We
> could actu
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> Yaro Kasear wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 06, 2011 18:13:04 Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> >> Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Yes the systemd topic keeps popping up, right now we don
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 07.04.2011 04:30, schrieb Thomas S Hatch:
> > Right, both are viable choices, btw I will be migrating my datacenters
> away
> > from dcron in the near future and doing a series of tests on cronie and
> > fcron, I
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:08 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 07.04.2011 04:36, schrieb Thomas S Hatch:
> > I like to hear that Tom!
> > Unfortunately many people think that having SELinux compiled in means
> that
> > it is running, having SELinux compiled into the core util
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:24 PM, David C. Rankin <
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 04:43 PM, Sander Jansen wrote:
>
>> This seems to be a monthly recurring discussion. How about not
>> providing any default, just put all the different cron(s) in extra?
>> I think eventually s
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:01 PM, DrCR wrote:
> Could you guys elaborate on why you dislike selinux. I would
> appreciate it. Do you prefer AppArmor, or do you dislike that as well?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis
> wrote:
> >> As for adding SELinux support in base but kee
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Heiko Baums
> wrote:
> >
> >> Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:25:42 -0600
> >> schrieb Thomas S Hatch :
> >>
>
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
> > cronie has anacron features and I think is a good option.
> >
>
> Unfortunately cronie isn't even in [community] yet. I've been trying to get
>
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:57:58 -0600
> schrieb Thomas S Hatch :
>
> > All I want is a good decision to be made and have a crond that is not
> > buggy. Therefore I think that it is foolish not to present the
> > avail
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:30:26 -0600
> schrieb Thomas S Hatch :
>
> > dcron and fcron are not under active development,
>
> fcron is under active development. It's just feature complete and
> therefore not develope
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:25:42 -0600
> schrieb Thomas S Hatch :
>
> > As for adding SELinux support in base but keeping it turned off by
> > default, +1
>
> Then you mean adding it to [core]. (base) is supposed to be
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> >
> > I am saving the "include SELINUX support in base for a latter date"
> >
> > my understanding though is that the stated position of Arch was "no
> > systemd&q
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Sander Jansen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Heiko Baums
> wrote:
> >
> >> Am Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:27:27 +0200
> >> schrieb Thomas Bächler :
> >&
re
set, etc are stable
cronie implements advanced security hooks as well and can integrate with
SELINUX (I am saving the "include SELINUX support in base for a latter
date")
At the outset I think that cronie looks to be the most viable option, but
merits further investigation.
-Thomas S Hatch
-Arch Linux Trusted User
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Corey Johns wrote:
> fcron is pretty much the de facto cron of choice for anyone needing a cron
> without special case needs. A nice general cron program.
>
> I do wonder about the bureaucratic processes in place to facillitate such a
> switch, though.
>
The thin
I can think of three considerations for a cron daemon:
1 . Minimal - its a cron daemon, it does not need to be complex
2. Active development
3. Anacron functionality
As far as I can see this leaves us with fcron, dcron and cronie. Cronie
probably has the highest assurance for upstream development
This is one of the best April fools day jobs I have ever seen, good job!
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Milos Negovanovic <
milos.negovano...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 05:24:37PM +0100, Cédric Girard wrote:
> > No. But what I understood from what Thomas said is: as you need to reboot
> > your server anyway from time to time to apply security update
2011/3/25 Cédric Girard
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 4:22 PM, David Rosenstrauch >wrote:
>
> > Just wondering: what's the general policy about how often (and why)
> > kernel26-lts gets updated? I know it's supposed to be a "long-term
> > supported" kernel, making it more appropriate for servers a
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> > If you are familiar with a project spearheaded by Red Hat called Func,
> Salt
> > is very similar.
> >
> > On Thursday I released my first rel
collaboration!
-Thomas S Hatch
ity sooner than
later! Working with Puppet Labs has been nothing short of a pleasure.
-Thomas S Hatch
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> > I think that the unfolding systemd issues here and the fact that we may
> be
> > required to move to systemd might rewrite this pro
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:03 PM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Lee Burton wrote:
> >>
> >> Append is okay (most likely dependencies are already in place for a
> >
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:26:08 -0600
> Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Dieter Plaetinck
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:58:19 -0600
> > > Thomas S Hat
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:26:08 -0600
> Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Dieter Plaetinck
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:58:19 -0600
> > > Thomas S Hat
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Lee Burton wrote:
> Append is okay (most likely dependencies are already in place for a
> service), but it would be nice to specify dependencies / ensure
> necessary services are running. We should allow the module writer /
> administrator to specify these depen
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:58:19 -0600
> Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
> > But regardless, this should support the Arch style runlevel.
>
> maybe... in theory it's possible that in a month we switch to systemd as
>
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:43 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:32 AM, C Anthony Risinger
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> >> I am posting this to venture an opinion, and see if anyone has any ideas
>
://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/6697
Thank you for your ideas!
-Thomas S Hatch
-Arch Linux Trusted User
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Magnus Therning wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 01:10:34PM -0700, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> [..]
> > Yes, there sure is, there is a lot of backend code that I am working
> > on, but this is coming along!
> >
> > I am still as much as a
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Nicolás Reynolds wrote:
> El 27/01/11 10:36, Thomas S Hatch dijo:
> > I have mentioned this subject before on aur-general, but I wanted to open
> a
> > discussion about it in the broader community.
> >
> > I have spent a great deal
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:32 AM, David C. Rankin <
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
> Guys,
>
> It works! After building kdebase (and fighting with other modules), I just
> decided to start trinity and see if it would work. Changed ~/.xinitrc to
> 'startkde' and then typed 'startx' and:
>
n [community] which he owns,
> > therefore I like to see these packages adopted or moved to
> > [unsupported] .
> He own a lot of package. I hope too TUs will adopt them, and they will
> not fall in AUR.
>
> I applaud his work. Good road!
>
> --
> Sébastien Luttringer
> www.seblu.net
>
I will grab a bunch of these :)
-Thomas S Hatch
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Tavian Barnes wrote:
> On 2 February 2011 13:25, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tavian Barnes <
> taviana...@tavianator.com>wrote:
> >
> >> On 2 February 2011 01:10, David C. Rankin
> >> wro
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Tavian Barnes wrote:
> On 2 February 2011 01:10, David C. Rankin
> wrote:
> > On 02/01/2011 10:41 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> >> (3) Lastly, if anybody has interest, please look over the PKGBUILDs
> and let me
> >> know where I'm doing something stupid. I have
should/will only get nixed if it stops getting maintained.
> >
> >
>
> Thanks Peter, Ray, Thomas and Ng,
>
>I'll get the framework done this weekend. It is a double bonus doing
> it here,
> Trinity uses FosWiki and it is miserable compared to mediawiki :)
>
> --
> David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
>
Thanks David, I am excited to see it!
-Thomas S Hatch
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Isaac Dupree <
> m...@isaac.cedarswampstudios.org> wrote:
>
>> On 01/28/11 09:32, Jakob Gruber wrote:
>>
>>> Another aspect of this is security. Right now,
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
> On 29 January 2011 01:20, David C. Rankin
> wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> >As I work through building the pkgbuilds for Trinity on Arch, I
> have
> > been keeping notes, etc. on what has to take place. I will put that
> > information up on a
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Isaac Dupree <
m...@isaac.cedarswampstudios.org> wrote:
> On 01/28/11 09:32, Jakob Gruber wrote:
>
>> Another aspect of this is security. Right now, any dev / TU could
>> theoretically check in a correct PKGBUILD but upload a binary package
>> with *insert malicio
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:08 AM, C Anthony Risinger >wrote:
> >
> > But with that said I feel very strongly that my wants as a commercial
> u
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:08 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> >
> > Jakob, YES! You are spot on here, one of the main motivations behind a
> > system like this is security. While I don't think that t
s system will
almost definitely have ramifications on the software release process.
Thanks! Keep the comments coming!
-Thomas S Hatch
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 28/01/11 03:36, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
>
>> I have been passively working on a similar project called quarters, but I
>> must admit that my motivation is somewhat low not knowing if the project
>> is
>> in dema
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:57 PM, C Anthony Risinger >wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> >> wrote:
>
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:57 PM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> >
> > Awesome, I actually have a few servers I will use, and since it will be
> > distributed, we will be able to use a lot of servers as builder
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
>
> > We have been discussing this in the TU chat, and there is a lot of
> > excitement about it, I am going to post some degign docs on the wiki here
> >
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:01 PM, C Anthony Risinger >wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> >> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:01 PM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Thomas S Hatch
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ray Rashif
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 28 January 2011 01:36, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> >> > I have b
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ray Rashif wrote:
> On 28 January 2011 01:36, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> > I have been passively working on a similar project called quarters, but I
> > must admit that my motivation is somewhat low not knowing if the project
> is
> >
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
> On 27/01/11 17:36, Thomas S Hatch wrote:
> [...]
>
> > I have been passively working on a similar project called quarters, but I
> > must admit that my motivation is somewhat low not knowing if the project
> is
&
et me know, my motivation should soar and I will make Arch
a super continuous package build system!
-Thomas S Hatch
-TU
81 matches
Mail list logo
