On 05/05/10 14:45, Dan McGee wrote:
Include the object file directly from the libalpm version comparison code as
it is the only thing we need. This drops the dependency of vercmp on
libalpm and all of the stuff we know it drags in.
Signed-off-by: Dan McGeed...@archlinux.org
---
snip
After
On 26/04/10 19:05, Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration | Westermann GmbH
] wrote:
It handled the GLOB_NOMATCH case silently in the default handler.
But a debug print would help alot eg. on typos in include rules.
You can find an altered version attached.
The updated version looks fine to me
On 01/05/10 14:27, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
Hi, guys.
I've been studying apt to see how they manage this situation and here
are my conclusions until now, together with a draft of a solution for
Arch. I would like to thank Linas for the heads up about the web of
trust of GnuPG. It is a
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 05/05/10 14:45, Dan McGee wrote:
Include the object file directly from the libalpm version comparison code
as
it is the only thing we need. This drops the dependency of vercmp on
libalpm and all of the stuff we know it
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 25/04/10 01:36, Allan McRae wrote:
Updated list of things that need done before release:
(** indicates patches available)
(* indicates a patch needing revision is available)
1**) Nagy's -D patch should be included.
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was
generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing
the project The official pacman repository.
The branch, master has been updated
via d485c0370f554758a28eff2cc32b2cc9c72a4604 (commit)
via
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Jonathan Conder j...@skurvy.no-ip.org wrote:
Hi again
I like this patch. Sometimes (-Sp, for example) it is needless to
compute this info, so this little speed-up is one more minor argument
for on-demand download-size computing.
Glad to hear it.
I also
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 3:51 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
3. Package signing by developers
When a developer builds a new package, makepkg will have the options
to sign the package too, with the developer's own key (not the KSK, if
the developer owns one). At this point, there are
Allan McRae wrote:
3. Package signing by developers
When a developer builds a new package, makepkg will have the options
to sign the package too, with the developer's own key (not the KSK, if
the developer owns one). At this point, there are three options (that
we should choose now) for the
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Linas linas...@ymail.com wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
The first method is what is currently used on the gpg patches that are
available. The signature is made in a separate file and then is
inserted in the repo db when the package is added.
I would prefer having
Am Mittwoch, den 05.05.2010, 16:13 +1000 schrieb Allan McRae:
On 26/04/10 19:05, Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration | Westermann GmbH
] wrote:
It handled the GLOB_NOMATCH case silently in the default handler.
But a debug print would help alot eg. on typos in include rules.
You can find
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm also thinking in putting this proposal in the Arch Wiki, so we can
keep up with the changes. And there are lots of details to append to
the document.
I took the liberty to create a new page on the Wiki.
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 11:47 -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
I think you broke something unintentionally, see this commit:
6d79ba2db0f37f46b925a509ef83724fc0f61184
You completely removed the loop in _alpm_sync_prepare that makes sure
we have a filename for each participating package. Does that still
Thanks to Dan for pointing out a mistake I made.
---
lib/libalpm/db.h |3 ++-
lib/libalpm/sync.c | 14 +-
2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/libalpm/db.h b/lib/libalpm/db.h
index 9b78ad4..1851b5c 100644
--- a/lib/libalpm/db.h
+++
On 06/05/10 03:33, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 3:51 AM, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
5.2 devtools
I don't know them, so I can't comment. But the upload and repo.db
generation will be affected, for sure.
repo-add is also mostly good to go (there are some
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 06/05/10 03:33, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
Aleksis already cloned your gpg branch and created a project on
gitorious. I think is easier to make the changes there, test and play
with ideans and just after that merge
Thanks to Dan for pointing out a mistake I made.
Personally I prefer the old patch over this. If I read this patch
correctly, you have completely removed the on-demand computation from
current pacman GUI. The old patch was better for -Sp for example...
I think we should catch the
On 06/05/10 02:31, Dan McGee wrote:
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 25/04/10 01:36, Allan McRae wrote:
4**) Pull in other stuff from working branches
- Nagy has another couple of minor patches
- Xavier has a couple (I am not sure about asciidoc
Here is some justification for the patches on my working branch related
to integrity checking. Put in order from least controversial to most...
1) cd3910b makepkg -g: use checksums defined in the pkgbuild
This is Xavier's patch. I am not sure there was ever issues with this
one, but I
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
When pacman queries the ownership of an object that is not a path,
it will check in the users PATH for a match. Implements FS#8798.
Original-patch-by: Shankar jatheen...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Allan McRae
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
Here is some justification for the patches on my working branch related to
integrity checking. Put in order from least controversial to most...
1) cd3910b makepkg -g: use checksums defined in the pkgbuild
This is
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Linas linas...@ymail.com wrote:
I would prefer having the signature along the package. Maybe as a tar
extended header.
This way you can't lose the detached signature (it also
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Dan McGee dpmc...@gmail.com wrote:
On second thought, I think I've ripped apart my own branches on this
very issue several times, so don't think that just any code is going
to be good enough to get in. This is tricky stuff, especially when
balancing being both
On Thu 06 May 2010 10:51 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
2) cd1378d makepkg: rework --skipinteg
This is very, very, VERY useful. I did not have makepkg-git on my
new computer earlier this week and the current makepkg behaviour
annoyed me A LOT.
This is particularly useful when testing out a
On 06/05/10 11:03, Dan McGee wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
When pacman queries the ownership of an object that is not a path,
it will check in the users PATH for a match. Implements FS#8798.
Original-patch-by: Shankarjatheen...@gmail.com
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
denisfalqu...@gmail.com wrote:
Just replying to say that I've edited the script, because now I've
really tested it :) I think it is working as should now. Suggestion of
test: export a key from your personal keyring with
$ gpg --export
On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 10:51 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
3) 5d911ae makepkg: allow skipping integrity checks when making source
package
And here is the fun one... makepkg --source currently requires
checking all checksums. Using -source --skipinteg does not skip this,
which in itself makes
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 18:18 -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
Looks good now, except for one other mistake that I've fixed already
locally but I should point out to you- the patch doesn't even compile.
:) You tried treating a list pointer as a package object directly
rather than get the data pointer off
28 matches
Mail list logo
