On Wednesday, July 21, 2010, Tech Support
Department wrote:
> I guess we users will have to start a new document somewhere
> based upon trial and error.
Or, uh... post patches to the development mailing list, or the bug
tracker, or send emails to any of the mailing lists, or send git pull
requests
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Florian Pritz
wrote:
> On 28.03.2010 14:27, Allan McRae wrote:
>> On 28/03/10 22:12, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
>>> Hi Allan,
>>>
>>> can't we use shebangs instead of inventing our own which-shell-to-use
>>> implementation? (#!/bin/sh, #!/bin/bash, ..)
>>
>> No we can
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 2:35 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 03.03.2010 04:59, schrieb Dan McGee:
>>> The force flag is a big ugly crap.
>>> I find sanitizing upstream version to be much.. saner.
>>> Or figure out a way to have both a sane version for pacman and the
>>> insane upstream version.
>>
>
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Roman Kyrylych
wrote:
> Any ideas about this?
> And if it's a known issue - how to fix it?
Your terminal is configured wrong. What is $TERM set to? If you are in
screen it should be screen (or some variant such as screen-bce)
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Cedric Staniewski wrote:
> On 25.02.2010 23:43, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Cedric Staniewski wrote:
>>> The location of the used utilities may and does differ between various
>>> distributions and therefore
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Cedric Staniewski wrote:
> The location of the used utilities may and does differ between various
> distributions and therefore absolute paths do not work well. Since the
> main purpose of its introduction was to avoid side-effects caused by
> aliases, it is suffic
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Paul Dufresne wrote:
>> I have tested pacman recompiled with a 40 sec fetchTimeout rather than 10.
>>
>> But first I began by recommenting out the XferCommand in
>> /etc/pacman.conf, first rebuild pacman without
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Xavier wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>>> * The alpm_rmrf function is available from the frontend, which does
>>> the same
>>> as this function did.
>>>
>>>
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:45 PM,
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> It's worth noting that the following works two:
works *too
Damn your scripts being named "one" and "two"
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This problem has been doing my head in... First a minimal example that
>> reflects how makepkg does things:
>>
>> --one.sh--
>> #!/bin/bash
>>
>> echo "pass 1:"
>> for arg
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Dan McGee wrote:
>>
>> Just as we do in -Qi, we can compute required by information for sync
>> database packages. The behavior seems sane; for a given package, the -Si
>> required by will show all packages in *any* sync database that require i
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>> Comments welcome on the icc one :)
>
> The only comment I had... the patch doesn't make sense. I mean,
> makepkg has no notion of gcc, and we can use it just fine with ANY
> compiler. All this logic belongs in the b
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
>> 2009/10/2 huntxu
>>
>>>
>>> 2. let makepkg install custom license automatically
>>> When making packages whose licenses are "custom", we use PKGBUILD to
>>> install the license file manually. Si
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is one part of the makepkg test suite I am working on. It is fairly a
> simple class that takes a pacman package filename and does some parsing.
> Currently that involves getting the file list and the info from the
> .PKGINFO fil
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Laszlo Papp wrote:
>>
>> ./src/pacman/pacman.h:
>> - The defines were placed here that are used in the
>> pacman.c source file
>> ./src/pacman/pacman.c
>> - Long options were refactored because of a safer and more
>>
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Dan McGee wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Aaron Griffin
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Xavier wrote:
>>>> Today I got very strange results downlo
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Xavier wrote:
> Today I got very strange results downloading packages with pacman.
> For example :
> gnome-common-2.28.0... 8,9K 112,2K/s 00:00:00
> [#] 21167%
>
>> ls -lh /var/cache/pacman/pkg/gnome-common-2.28.0-1-any.pkg.tar.gz
> -rw-r-
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:
> Hey all
>
> Would it be OK (as in KISS) to shove in a custom kernel's equivalent
> firmware into /lib/firmware/$(uname -r)? By looking at the
> /lib/udev/firmware.sh script it's one of the default look-up paths. But if I
> (and subsequent third-
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for pointing that out.
>>>> I only did a quick look at the outputs of a recursive grep for getopt but
>>>> misse
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration
| Westermann GmbH ] wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 18:05 +0200 schrieb Marc - A. Dahlhaus
> [ Administration | Westermann GmbH ]:
>> Am Donnerstag, den 17.09.2009, 01:45 +1000 schrieb Allan McRae:
>> > Marc - A. Dahlhaus
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> bardo wrote:
>>
>> Is it my impression or there are some problems with $SRCDEST and
>> $PKGDEST? I didn't define any of these variables in both my
>> makepkg.conf, the guest one and the chroot one. In makechrootpkg,
>> lines 155-157, I see:
>>
>>
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Am Donnerstag 03 September 2009 00:02:03 schrieb Dan McGee:
>> Why use -i at all then? Since you want to check the install, shouldn't
>> that be a seperate step in your script? E.g. Run makepkg, check for a
>> 0 return, then run pacman and che
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Oleg Finkelshteyn wrote:
>> P.P.S.: Seems the mails don't contain a Reply-To: -- is that normal?
>> My mail client thinks it should reply to the sender rather than the
>> list.
&g
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Oleg Finkelshteyn wrote:
> P.P.S.: Seems the mails don't contain a Reply-To: -- is that normal?
> My mail client thinks it should reply to the sender rather than the
> list.
mailman settings look of, and it works for me in gmail
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Giovanni Scafora wrote:
> 2009/7/29, Roman Kyrylych :
>> Hi!
>>
>> During my translation of pacman/libalpm files
>> I've noticed a significant number of inconsistencies
>> and messages that are difficult to translate to a language
>> that is quite different from
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 7:54 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> Another thought would be to make the scriptlet executable and pass the
>> "function" as an arg to the script, this way we can support
>> #!/bin/bash
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Loui Chang wrote:
> On Tue 28 Jul 2009 18:50 +0200, Xavier wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Loui Chang wrote:
>> > I was experimenting using dash as /bin/sh and noticed that a lot of
>> > packages were having errors in their install scriptlets.
>> >
>> >
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> 3. If your name is Allan McRae (or anyone else) and you run an x86_64
> kernel in an i686 userspace
Oh, that guy? He owes me twenty bucks
Honestly though, I get your point - nocheck makes sense. But it does
sound like it should be the edge case,
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Steven Blatchford
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Dan,
>>>>
&
Just checking the sanity of an idea here:
What do you all think of supporting wildcards for version comparisons?
I was thinking fnmatch could almost be dropped in directly to
alpm_pkg_vercmp in place of the initial strcmp.
Use case:
readline version 6.0.003
bash depends readline=6.0.*
Thoughts?
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Steven Blatchford
> wrote:
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> I'm sure this has been brought up in the pacman ML but I couldn't find
>> it quickly. Do you think it would be useful to check the architecture
>> of the machine (eg th
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Roman
Kyrylych wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 20:47, Roman Kyrylych wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 05:19, Dan McGee wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:19 AM, unohu wrote:
> IMHO it is a lack of direction rather than lack of man power. If there is a
> correct road map/consensus of what/how we want to implement, i am sure there
> are few persons here(including me) who would like to see this implemented
> and are ready to wo
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Xavier wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Dan McGee wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Aaron Griffi
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Xyne wrote:
>>... send the translations directly to Dan or me.
>
> *fixed*
While I'm sure Allan just made a innocent mistake, I've always liked this one.
For those non-native English speakers: The rule of thumb is to replace
the "___ and I/me" with just the I/me p
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Dan McGee wrote:
>>
>> Should be all better now?
>
> Only one way to find out...
Success.
Note to Dan - reading the left-hand blurb, it says "leave this setting
blank to skip this check" - that might be beneficial here. Dunno. We
can still use
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Dan McGee wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Aaron Griffin
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
>>>> 2009/3/23 Samed Beyribey :
>&
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Pieter Steyn wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I've asked TENET (South African university network) to mirror
> Archlinux a few months ago, and have been happily using:
>
> http://archlinux.mirror.ac.za/$repo/os/i686
> http://archlinux.mirror.ac.za/$repo/os/x86_64/
>
> or ftp://
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 June 2009 07:27:11 Aaron Griffin wrote:
>> As a rather wild aside here... what would be the downside of sticking
>> the entire PKGBUILD in the pacman DB? How much size would that add?
>
> Wont make that
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:08 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Xyne wrote:
>>>
>>> Note that all of these are easily done already... either grepping
>>> through the ABS tree or using the rebuild scripts that I posted to the
>>> arch-dev-public list.
>>>
>>> The only advantage I see of this is that instead
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Xyne wrote:
>> > Can someone give some concrete examples of how this could be useful in
>> > the absence of the other packaging information and who would be likely
>> > to use this?
>>
>> Maybe "built" was too strong of a word... what I was trying to say:
>> You can
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Xyne wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> > Pierre Schmitz wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Am Sonntag 14 Juni 2009 10:28:00 schrieb Allan McRae:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm not really a fan of this as it fills the PKGINFO file and pacman DB
>> >>> with i
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Pierre Schmitz wrote:
>>
>> Am Sonntag 14 Juni 2009 10:28:00 schrieb Allan McRae:
>>
>>>
>>> I'm not really a fan of this as it fills the PKGINFO file and pacman DB
>>> with info that is really not needed. At the moment you can simply grep
>>>
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Jürgen Hötzel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I doubt this was by intention:
>
> errors in build() functions are only fatal, if "--log" is enabled.
>
> I just made a buggy pkg because some "install ..." commands
> where not handled by "|| return 1".
>
> Our PKGBUILDs are cluttert
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> - eval "${indirect}=\"${!var}\""
>> + eval "${indirect}=(\${$v...@]})"
>>
>
> Bonus points for anyone who understands what I was doing and what is being
> done now... All I know is that is works! :)
Well... what i
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Nagy Gabor wrote:
> Hi!
>
> After killing pmsyncpkg_t, there is not much difference between -S and
> -U transactions. The only difference is that trans->packages come from
> pkgcache (-S) or they are loaded from file (-U). And of course, with -S
> we have an extra st
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Marc - A. Dahlhaus wrote:
> Dan McGee schrieb:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Marc - A. Dahlhaus wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Allan McRae schrieb:
>>>
Marc - A. Dahlhaus wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> i've spotted a problem in makepkg's cleanup
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> Dan McGee wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
>>>
When making a source package for a SCM PKGBUILD, makepkg should not
update the pkgver/pkgrel.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:45 PM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a set of draft scripts that I use to find/extract some data of
> ELF files from packages.
> For example:
>
> * Find all packages that needed inexistent shared objects because a
> soname bump in libraries.
> * Generat
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:19 AM, Teran McKinney wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hey,
>
> This is already in Icadyptes' makepkg as runtimedeps=(). Not sure if
> runtimedeps=() matches the PKGBUILD variable naming scheme as much, but
> I would appreciate considering to
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
>>>> +/** A callback for downloading
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
>> +/** A callback for downloading files
>> + * @param url the URL of the file to be downloaded
>> + * @param localpath the directory to which the file should be downloaded
>> + * @param
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> $ ./src/pacman/.libs/lt-pacman -Qy glibc pacman-git
> glibc 2.9-4
> pacman-git 20090116-1
> file n°1512 (package 2/2): OK
> No damaged packages.
>
> We should probably only do verification and not print the names of the
> packages and run them th
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 8:52 AM, changaco wrote:
> From 7c0348fa499f55968764fef4c7bb3d3d7245932b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Charly COSTE
> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 12:36:23 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] New feature: files verification
>
> A new option "-Qy" which checks if the files owned by a/som
2009/3/27 Dario Freddi :
> Not really a bump. I just wanted to know if this patch will ever be in, no
> matter when.
>
> To talk bluntly: if you assure me this patch is going to make it in the main
> pacman tree, and you simply don't know when, I'll apply it in my local copy
> and start hacking wit
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For some reason, this line in the clean_up() function is not working:
>
> rm -f "${pkgname}-${pkgver}-${pkgrel}-${CARCH}.log*"
>
> Printing out the value shows everything looks OK but the * does not appear
> to be wildcarding.
>
> To re
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> 2009/3/23 Samed Beyribey :
>> Well i just noticed that, (probably) mailman rejects my attachment (it
>> was 9.5k)
>> so i've put it on my web site:
>> http://eventualis.org/pacman/0001-fixed-typos-and-alignment-problem-in-Turkish-transla.patch.gz
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
>
> On 17/03/2009, at 9:22 AM, Jeff wrote:
>
>> The reason for this email, though, is that I subbed to this list to
>> watch how things are done, learn protocol, etc. So I grabbed the git
>> repo and started looking at how I was going to ap
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Dario Freddi wrote:
> Bumping again. Any chances to get this into the main tree?
P-p-p-please, Dan? *puppy dog eyes*
___
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-d
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Simon Legner wrote:
> It does:
> options=('force' '!makeflags')
Yeah, that's what force does. It tells pacman "ignore the version
compare, this is an upgrade, damnit"
Force is usually used when an upgrade is non-obvious or something like
that, like an upgra
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Simon Legner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I installed QGIS 1.0.0-1 from AUR, but pacman (version 3.2.2-1) suggests a
> package upgrade to version 0.11.0-2 in community:
> warning: qgis: ignoring package upgrade (1.0.0-1 => 0.11.0-2)
> Is it a bug?
Does the package have
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Nagy Gabor wrote:
>>>
>>> Redux:
>>> /usr/lib/zomg.so is not owned by any package. Allow foobar-1.0-2 to
>>> overwrite this file? [y/N]
>>>
>>> Optional:
>>> s/overwrite/claim ownership of/
>>>
>>
>> In this case we don't need overwrite option a
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:54 AM, Pierre Schmitz
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi pacman devs,
>>>
>>> Sometimes it happens that a user has to force an upgrade bec
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:54 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Hi pacman devs,
>
> Sometimes it happens that a user has to force an upgrade because pacman
> detects an file conflict.
>
> Some of those cases are caused by the known link vs. regular file/directory
> problem.
>
> Others are caused by the fa
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Xavier wrote:
> find_pkgentry()
> {
> local pkgname=$1
> local pkgentry
> for pkgentry in $gstmpdir/$pkgname*; do
> name=${pkgentry##*/}
> if [ "${name%-*-*}" = "$pkgname" ]; then
> echo $pkgentry
> return 0
> fi
> done
> return 1
> }
Is t
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, good questions. I was thinking that we would simply run "repo-add
>> --deltas" or something, but it still requires us to figure out the old
>
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Xavier wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Aaron Griffin
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So, ok, f
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> correctly construct deltas in different directories, or do we also
> need to copy the file next to the new package before running pkgdelta
> need to be next to each other?
Ignore the last "need to be next to each other&q
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>>
>> So, ok, from a db-scripts point of view, we're going to have to do the
>> following:
>>
>> when a new package is added:
>> copy old p
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> Is there delta information
>> stored in the pacman DB? If so, the cleanup gets far more complicated?
>
> Delta information is stored in the repo so removing them is not a simple
> dele
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>>
>> Questions which make the implementation complex:
>> * When do we generate deltas? As part of the db scripts?
>
> Well I think that would be practica
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Matthew Wood wrote:
> I'm a little new to package management coding, so forgive my stupid
> question, but I'm wondering if there is a way to get the current package
> size. For example, like Aarons example, if foobar-1.0 is installed, and we
> got the size of foob
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
>
> On 24/02/2009, at 2:56 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Brendan Hide
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Again, this will be properly fixed as soon as pacman correctly takes into
>
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> I really don't mind the talk about workflow (I have improved my weak
>> git-fu), but following this list has been difficult in the last few days
>> because of lack of subject line changes.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Bryan Ischo
wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> I dunno, I don't see this as a problem because it's just not the way
>> my workflow works. I make heavy use of git (well, git svn) at work, on
>> huge amounts of code, and neve
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Bryan Ischo
wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> I use git stash when switching back and forth between branches when I
>> am of the mindset that "oh this isn't commit-able yet".
>>
>> I keep noticing you mention &quo
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Bryan Ischo
wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Sebastian Nowicki
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 23/02/2009, at 12:57 PM, Bryan Ischo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Brendan Hide wrote:
> Again, this will be properly fixed as soon as pacman correctly takes into
> account the errors given when doing the actual deployment. Personally, I
> like the idea of adding sanity checks - but only if they're done properly.
> ;)
I wouldn't
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 5:58 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Brendan Hide
> wrote:
>> Xavier wrote:
>>>
>>> how Garns answered to them:
>>> ...
>>> For Arch this would mean creating deltas on Gerolde, which seems to
>>> be fairly strained already.
>>> ...
>>> http://www.arch
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> One of the things that needs fixed in the splitpkg work is the printing of
> informational messages. I.e. when printing anything to do with $pkgname.
> Think of the following messages.
> - "is not available for the ? architectur
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
>
> On 23/02/2009, at 12:57 PM, Bryan Ischo wrote:
>
>> OK, so I guess I really need to get into the habit of using git-rebase -i.
>
> Yes, git rebase is one of the most wonderful things about git.
git rebase -i, git add -p, and git stash
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> Dan McGee wrote:
>>>
>>> I never use git-merge when doing my own work, btw- I'm really not sure
>>> that makes workflow easy at all, as I tend to cherrypick things around
>>> on multiple w
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Dario Freddi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm all in for this, thanks Sebastian. This would allow to remove a _HUGE_
> quantity of unneeded callbacks in alpm, and from my point of view, it is
> really great (especially for Shaman/Aqpm). For what it's worth, I'd like to
> ad
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Teran McKinney wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hey,
>
> I've personally ran into this before, but don't think that it is worth
> "fixing" in the current Pacman setup. User error is usually the cause of
> this, since an admin should al
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Matthew Wood wrote:
> Good Evening-
>
> In following the posting at:
> http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=502174#p502174. I was wondering
> what the status of the disk space issue was and if I could assist in working
> out a disk space checking function to
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
>
> On 20/02/2009, at 2:03 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Sebastian Nowicki
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> This allows a frontend to define its own download algorithm so that the
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
> This allows a frontend to define its own download algorithm so that the
> libfetch dependency can be omitted without using an external process.
> The callback will be used when if it is defined, otherwise the old
> behavior applies.
I l
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> We probably should be using 4-wide tab stops, but as you can see in
> the files, the modeline currently sets it to 2. If we were to change
> this we would have an awful lot of ugly code staring at us, and I'm
> not quite ready to take that plung
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Aaron Griffin
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Xavier Chantry wrote:
>>> +exec 3< <(cmd)
>>> +while IFS= read -r -d '' pacfile <&3; do
>>>
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Xavier Chantry wrote:
> +exec 3< <(cmd)
> +while IFS= read -r -d '' pacfile <&3; do
>...
> +exec 3>&-
Wow this looks ugly. Is the anything gained over using a construct like this:
cmd | while read pacfile; do
...
done
_
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 3:05 AM, Patrick Walton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that libalpm isn't reentrant/thread-safe, even though it defines
> pmhandle_t to store all global information instead of using multiple global
> variables. This is unfortunate for my use case. I'm thinking about writing a
>
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Bryan Ischo
> wrote:
>> I hate to be reduced to begging, but after weeks of no one taking my
>> patches, this is what I have to do. I jumped through every hoop I was asked
>> to jump through to get my patches ac
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am writing to inform you that I have changed all the Arch lists to
> reject HTML formatted email. Please send messages in plain text only.
>
> Note: This is true of all lists, but I am only sending this m
Hello all,
I am writing to inform you that I have changed all the Arch lists to
reject HTML formatted email. Please send messages in plain text only.
Note: This is true of all lists, but I am only sending this message to
the higher trafficked lists.
Cheers,
Aaron
_
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:59 AM, Xavier wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
>>
>>
>> I haven't looked at this in detail yet, but if this solution is more
>> portable and has no feature loss, why not use it by default?
>>
>
> I had the same question :P
My guess would be
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> The reason I used eval originally was to catch the
>> pkgver=${_somever/-/_} type stuff. Does using declare still work that
>> way?
>>
>
> Afaik, m
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Xavier wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
>> Yes, I think I sent this to myself on accident. Looks like it is time
>> for another cup of coffee.
>>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Dan McGee
>> Date: Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 12
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Jan Mette wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> i have just finished a port of our KDEmod PKGBUILDs to
> makepkg with split support and want to tell you that
> everything works just dandy :)
>
> All 390 packages are building fine, no workarounds or
> crazy stuff needed.
Exciti
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
>> Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration | Westermann GmbH ] wrote:
>>>
>>> Am Samstag, den 24.01.2009, 00:52 +1000 schrieb Allan McRae:
>>>
>>&
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
