August 2024 - Arch-dev-public - lists.archlinux.org

RFC: Streamline the RFC writing process
by Robin Candau 15 Nov '24

15 Nov '24

A new RFC (request for comment) has been opened here: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/43 Please visit the above link for discussion. Summary: Streamline the writing and publishing of RFCs by relying on markdown and dedicated spellcheckers and linters. -- Regards, Robin Candau / Antiz

3 4

zlib-ng
by Jelle van der Waa 11 Nov '24

11 Nov '24

Hey All, I noticed Fedora is discussing switching from zlib to zlib-ng. zlib-ng is a fork of zlib, which seems to offer ~ 40% better performance and a new API. We have about ~ 1000 packages depending on zlib, zlib-ng does offer a compat option to keep zlib API compatibility. [1] # Proposal From a discussion in #archlinux-staff. It was determined that a possible plan would be to introduce zlib-ng as package in [extra] with the modern API enabled, we can then migrate packages over that are compatible to the new API. A zlib-ng-compat package can be provided, as proposed by Fedora, that activates the zlib API compatibility mode and directly provides libz.so. This package can provide/conflict the original zlib package, and potentially be target to replace zlib all together. In short: zlib-ng would provide libz-ng.so zlib-ng-compat would provide libz.so # Packages which might be able to use zlib-ng Alpine offers a package which has 6 required packages.[2] Debian's codesearch suggests a few packages seem to mention a possible zlib-ng compatibility. [3] These notes where written down last Thursday, in the meantime, Anthraxx uploaded zlib-ng to [extra], so we can start switching packages which use the modern API over. Replacing zlib with zlib-ng-compact is something we need to discuss, I've overheard so far that some test suites fail because they check the compressed test artifact's hash which with zlib-ng can be different. [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel%40lists.fedoraproject.o… [2] https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/package/edge/community/x86/zlib-ng [3] https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=zlib-ng&literal=1&perpkg=1 Greetings, Jelle van der Waa & Anthraxx

3 3

Replacing mlocate with plocate
by Morten Linderud 10 Sep '24

10 Sep '24

Yo! I'm going to drop `mlocate` from the repositories and provide `plocate` as the default locate in Arch Linux. mlocate is very much an abandoned project, while plocate is a modern implementation with a faster database implementation along with io_uring support. https://plocate.sesse.net/ The question is if people feel a strong desire to keep a locate implementation in `[core]` or if we are fine with this living inside `[extra]`. Adding `plocate` to `[core]` would mean we would need to move a `liburing` to `[core]` and I don't really know if we need that. Any opinions? -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16

4 4

ell 0.68-1 pulled from testing
by Andreas Radke 28 Aug '24

28 Aug '24

I have pulled ell 0.68-1 from testing because it breaks current iwd in extra and the new iwd release has not happened yet. Please downgrade to the ell version in extra repository. -Andy

1 0

News draft: Valkey to replace Redis in the [extra] Repository
by Frederik Schwan 13 Aug '24

13 Aug '24

Hi everyone, As you might have heard by now redis got a new license and *some* forks were created [1]. Valkey as one of them is developed by the Linux Foundation, and adopted by Fedora already [2]. So we think it's a good step to follow that path and replace redis by valkey. ------ # Valkey to replace Redis in the [extra] Repository valkey, a modern in-memory data store, will soon be replacing redis in the [extra] repository. This change is due to Redis modifying its license from BSD-3-Clause to RSALv2 and SSPLv1 on March 20th, 2024[1]. Arch Linux Package Maintainers intend to support the availability of the redis package for roughly 90 days from the day of this post, to enable a smooth transition to valkey. After the 90 transition period has ended, the redis package will be moved to the AUR. Also, from this point forward, the redis package will not receive any additional updates and should be considered deprecated until it is removed. Users are recommended to begin transitioning their use of redis to valkey as soon as possible to avoid possible complications after the 90 day transition window closes. [0] https://github.com/redis/redis/commit/0b34396924eca4edc524469886dc5be6c77ec… ------ Best regards, Andrew and Frederik [1] https://redis.io/blog/redis-adopts-dual-source-available-licensing/ [2] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press/linux-foundation-launches-open-source…

1 0

Ruby 3.2.4
by Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer 09 Aug '24

09 Aug '24

Hello, after a lot of work and some wrong avenues we are finally ready to update Ruby in Arch Linux to version 3.2.4. For this we will block staging from tomorrow (09.05.2024) on to do the rebuild, and it might take some time to complete. At the same time we also replace the approach of providing an /etc/gemrc with the more up-to-date approach of providing an operating_system.rb for ruby to rely on. This should solve several issues currently open for the ruby and the rubygems package. We know that Ruby 3.2.4 isn’t the latest version but we decided to do this one and maybe in a couple of months update to ruby 3.3.x once we are sure it is ready. During the update we will also drop some ruby default gem packages which are not needed anymore as we will not de-vendor all ruby defaultgems in the future. There might arise some dependency issues but we will have to face them when we see them. Best regards Segaja

1 3

RFC Final Comment Period: Distribution Developer Manual
by Levente Polyak 09 Aug '24

09 Aug '24

An RFC has now entered its Final Comment Period. In 14 days, discussion will end and the proposal will either be accepted, rejected or withdrawn: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/21 Please visit the above link for discussion. Summary: This RFC proposes the migration of Arch Linux's operational distro specifications from existing ArchWiki and other sources to a dedicated GitLab developer manual repository. The intention is to document how to run the distribution while leveraging GitLab's collaboration features and streamlined workflows for maintaining and evolving the resulting specifications. This change aims to centralize and enhance the efficiency of specification management while preserving the integrity of the community-contributed contentin the Wiki. This request for comments is superseding RFC-0005 by extending its scope to handle all distro specifications coherently instead of handling a single sub section (packaging guidelines) differently to others.

1 0

RFC: License Package Sources
by Sven-Hendrik Haase 07 Aug '24

07 Aug '24

A new RFC (request for comment) has been opened here: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/40 Please visit the above link for discussion. Summary: Our package sources currently do not have explicit licenses. This RFC proposes to license all Arch Linux package sources under the terms of the Zero-Clause BSD license.

1 0