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

[arch-dev-public] trouble building packages with .install files
by Jelle van der Waa 02 Jul '13

02 Jul '13

I'm having trouble building certain packages with .install files, for example aur/vim-youcompleteme-git. If I build it with extra-x86_64-build, I just get: ==> ERROR: install file (vimdoc.install) does not exist. I have the same issue on pkgbuild.com, for example the libreoffice PKGBUILD. I'm not sure what's causing this issue, but barthalion can also reproduce the problem. It seems startdir_host is empty. ─marlowe:pts/1 /var/lib/archbuild/extra-x86_64/barthalion └─% ls -lh startdir total 12K -rw------- 1 nobody root 902 Jul 1 11:53 PKGBUILD lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 Jul 1 11:53 YouCompleteMe -> /startdir_host/YouCompleteMe lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 29 Jul 1 11:53 vimdoc.install -> /startdir_host/vimdoc.install ┌─marlowe:pts/1 /var/lib/archbuild/extra-x86_64/barthalion └─% ls -lh startdir_host total 0 -- Jelle van der Waa

2 1

[arch-dev-public] linux-3.10-1 in [staging]
by Tobias Powalowski 02 Jul '13

02 Jul '13

Hi, I built the kernel, now there are issues with following - extra binary modules: nvidia-304xx - community binary modules: cdfs ndiswrapper open-vm-tools-modules r8168 Please find patches and fix those. Please report other issues. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

3 3

[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
by Arch Website Notification 02 Jul '13

02 Jul '13

=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 2 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 6 fully signed off packages * 16 packages missing signoffs * 2 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (2 total) == * transmission-2.80-1 (i686) * transmission-2.80-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (8 total) == * ed-1.9-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * make-3.82-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xz-5.0.5-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * ed-1.9-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * make-3.82-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * xz-5.0.5-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (8 total) == * qemu-1.5.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * subversion-1.8.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * transmission-2.80-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xf86-video-intel-2.21.11-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * qemu-1.5.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * transmission-2.80-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vim-7.3.1270-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * xf86-video-intel-2.21.11-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (6 total) == * dhcpcd-6.0.2-1 (i686) * syslinux-5.10-3 (i686) * dhcpcd-6.0.2-1 (x86_64) * syslinux-5.10-3 (x86_64) * vim-7.3.1270-1 (i686) * subversion-1.8.0-1 (x86_64) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * syslinux-5.10-3 (i686), since 2013-06-06 * syslinux-5.10-3 (x86_64), since 2013-06-06 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. lcarlier - 1 signoffs

1 0

Re: [arch-dev-public] [arch-general] /etc/shells should keep /bin/zsh
by Sébastien Luttringer 01 Jul '13

01 Jul '13

On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Chris Down <chris(a)chrisdown.name> wrote: > On 1 July 2013 18:32, Allan McRae <allan(a)archlinux.org> wrote: >> On 01/07/13 20:11, Karol Blazewicz wrote: >>> I know arch-general si not for reporting bugs and I'm not trying to >>> rush anyone, but it's been already a month of confusion wrt >>> > https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/commit/trunk?h=package… >>> >>> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/35724 >> >> If a bug is open that long, it is likely to be closed as "Won't Fix". > > I think that one reason the bug has been open so long is because it > requires consensus to resolve rather than actual bug fixing. Specifically: > for binaries involved in situations where the symlink does not make the > transition transparent (in this case, because it's the path itself that > matters in input), should they (ideally) have: > > a. both the old path and /usr/bin be acceptable > b. only the old path be acceptable > c. only the new path be acceptable > > I'm pretty sure nobody would argue in favour of option b preferentially. I > am in favour of Arch continuing its long history of being first to > deprecate and going for c as long as it doesn't pose any major technical > problem. I agree and I think we should choose to have all our shell paths in the same directory in /etc/shells. Have 2 paths will be painful with chsh as I describe in the bugreport. I can create a TODO to updates required packages when the consensus is reached. I remember Dave, arguing in favor of keeping sheebang to /bin/bash to ensure portability. Cheers, -- Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A

1 0

[arch-dev-public] Announcement for the 2013.07.01 ISO image
by Pierre Schmitz 01 Jul '13

01 Jul '13

Hi all, with the July install image a few notable features got added. There is initial support for secure boot and there are bootstrap tar files which can be used to install Arch from within another distribution. I have a hard time to write a news item about these though. I think it would be best if we had at least some short documentation about these in our wiki we can link to. There is probably no harm in delaying the announcement for a few days as these are just new features. Greetings, Pierre -- Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com

2 1

[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
by Arch Website Notification 01 Jul '13

01 Jul '13

=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 8 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 5 fully signed off packages * 15 packages missing signoffs * 2 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (8 total) == * make-3.82-6 (i686) * xz-5.0.5-1 (i686) * make-3.82-6 (x86_64) * xz-5.0.5-1 (x86_64) * subversion-1.8.0-1 (i686) * xf86-video-intel-2.21.11-1 (i686) * subversion-1.8.0-1 (x86_64) * xf86-video-intel-2.21.11-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (8 total) == * ed-1.9-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * make-3.82-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xz-5.0.5-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * ed-1.9-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * make-3.82-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * xz-5.0.5-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (7 total) == * qemu-1.5.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * subversion-1.8.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xf86-video-intel-2.21.11-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * qemu-1.5.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * subversion-1.8.0-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * vim-7.3.1270-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * xf86-video-intel-2.21.11-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (5 total) == * dhcpcd-6.0.2-1 (i686) * syslinux-5.10-3 (i686) * dhcpcd-6.0.2-1 (x86_64) * syslinux-5.10-3 (x86_64) * vim-7.3.1270-1 (i686) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * syslinux-5.10-3 (i686), since 2013-06-06 * syslinux-5.10-3 (x86_64), since 2013-06-06 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. angvp - 4 signoffs 2. jsteel - 2 signoffs

1 0

[arch-dev-public] Subversion 1.8.0 in [testing]
by Angel Velásquez 30 Jun '13

30 Jun '13

Hi guys, I've updated subversion to the last release and put into [testing], it used to be maintained by Stephane so it's my first time maintaining this package, since this is a major release I'd like to have some feedback before pushing to [extra] Thanks! -- Angel Velasquez Arch Linux Developer angvp @ irc.freenode.net http://www.angvp.com.ar

2 1

[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
by Arch Website Notification 30 Jun '13

30 Jun '13

=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 4 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 3 fully signed off packages * 9 packages missing signoffs * 2 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) == * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (i686) * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (x86_64) * vim-7.3.1270-1 (i686) * vim-7.3.1270-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (5 total) == * dhcpcd-6.0.2-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * ed-1.9-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * ed-1.9-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * libgpg-error-1.12-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (4 total) == * qemu-1.5.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vim-7.3.1270-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * qemu-1.5.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vim-7.3.1270-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (3 total) == * syslinux-5.10-3 (i686) * dhcpcd-6.0.2-1 (x86_64) * syslinux-5.10-3 (x86_64) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * syslinux-5.10-3 (i686), since 2013-06-06 * syslinux-5.10-3 (x86_64), since 2013-06-06 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[arch-dev-public] Bootstrap images for installing Arch from another system
by Thomas Bächler 30 Jun '13

30 Jun '13

So, I heard a few people struggled installing Arch from another distro or from a root server rescue system recently. The requirements for pacman and friends are numerous and most systems don't have recent enough libraries to easily meet them. Setting up Arch on a root server should be as easy as this: * Boot rescue system, make sure you have Linux 2.6.32 or later * Download tarball from Arch, extract to /tmp/root.x86_64/ * Set up partitions and such, mount to /tmp/root.x86_64/mnt/ * chroot /tmp/root.x86_64/ (well, also some bind-mounts) * pacman-key --populate archlinux * pacstrap /mnt base and follow the installation guide I'd like to generate such tarballs regularly (monthly like our ISOs?) and put them on our mirrors, unless there are objections. I took the liberty of writing a small script: https://paste.xinu.at/ixbqt/ These are the resulting files: total 143M -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 71M 22. Jun 17:13 archlinux-bootstrap-2013.06.22-i686.tar.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 73M 22. Jun 17:15 archlinux-bootstrap-2013.06.22-x86_64.tar.gz Note that they are only gzipped, because we can rely on tar and gzip being widely available. Any comments?

5 11

[arch-dev-public] Moving the latest vim to [extra].
by Thomas Dziedzic 29 Jun '13

29 Jun '13

I usually update vim every 50 new patches. But the latest vim has been in testing for > 300 patches because there have been some major changes introduced in preparation for 7.4 which have introduced a load of new bugs. I just updated vim in [testing] to 7.3.1270. I have been using the latest vim and have found that it is sufficiently bug free for me for general use. Please give vim in [testing] a shot and make sure to report any bugs. Unless there are any major issues, I want to finally move it to [extra] this wednesday. The area where you are most likely to experience any issues is when using the new regexp engine. If you notice slow syntax highlight or wrong regular expression matching, make sure to report it and set regexpengine=1 for a temporary workaround to switch to the old regular expression engine. Thanks and have a great weekend :)

1 0