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

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] openssl and openssh
by Pierre Schmitz 02 Nov '07

02 Nov '07

Hi, I have updated openssl to 0.9.8g. This fixes the api change introduced by 0.9.8f. I have rebuilt openssh, ruby and ntp. Please test if your openssl-apps still work. Pierre -- archlinux.de

5 4

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] csup in testing, now replaces cvsup
by Dan McGee 02 Nov '07

02 Nov '07

Need a signoff for i686 to move to current. PLEASE let me know if you are running core/glibc or testing/glibc, as I built it with testing and want to see if it is safe to push. x86_64 signoffs welcome too, I believe Eric is rebuilding as we speak. I will remove the CVS files from extra once this moves out of testing. -Dan

6 10

[arch-dev-public] Fwd: [arch] circular dependence in core
by Aaron Griffin 02 Nov '07

02 Nov '07

Forwarding to the dev list in case people don't read the arch list. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mister Dobalina <reebydobalina(a)yahoo.ca> Date: Nov 1, 2007 10:27 AM Subject: [arch] circular dependence in core To: General Discusson about Arch Linux <arch(a)archlinux.org> coreutils 6.9-3 -> depends on bash bash 3.2.025-1 -> depends on readline>=5.2 readline 5.2-4 -> depends on ncurses ncurses 5.6-4 -> depends on coreutils -> oops! Cheers, Jeremy

5 6

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] klibc 1.5-3, klibc-extras 2.3-1, klibc-udev 116-2, klibc-module-init-tools 3.2.2-1, mkinitcpio 0.5.16-1
by Thomas Bächler 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

Changes in these versions: klibc: - compile shared binaries by default (somehow this defaults to static in klibc 1.5) - patch klibc to be able to build klibc-module-init-tools - don't build insmod - rebuild against 2.6.23 headers klibc-extras: - update to 2.3, removed modprobe klibc-udev: - rebuild for new klibc, enable shared linking again klibc-module-init-tools: - initial commit to the repository (replaces insmod from klibc and modprobe from klibc-extras) mkinitcpio: - Fix #8448 - Change the base hook to work with klibc-m-i-t For reference, see these git repositories: http://projects.archlinux.org/git/?p=mkinitcpio.git;a=summary http://projects.archlinux.org/git/?p=klibc-extras.git;a=summary The proper way for signoff is: - Build an mkinitcpio image with a different filname than the default, but the same options - Boot - Signoff Tested and booting on x86_64.

3 3

[arch-dev-public] klibc static or shared building
by Dan McGee 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

On 10/31/07, Thomas Bächler <thomas(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > Changes in these versions: > > klibc: > - compile shared binaries by default (somehow this defaults to static in > klibc 1.5) > - patch klibc to be able to build klibc-module-init-tools > - don't build insmod > - rebuild against 2.6.23 headers > > klibc-extras: > - update to 2.3, removed modprobe > > klibc-udev: > - rebuild for new klibc, enable shared linking again > > klibc-module-init-tools: > - initial commit to the repository (replaces insmod from klibc and > modprobe from klibc-extras) > > mkinitcpio: > - Fix #8448 > - Change the base hook to work with klibc-m-i-t Just curious- what is the downside of building statically? It seems like it could be a plus in some ways, because you eliminate one more chance of breakage in early userspace. Of course, this also increases the size of your built binaries and increases the size of your initrd. -Dan

3 2

[arch-dev-public] New devtools in testing
by Dan McGee 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

I pushed a 0.4 release of devtools to the testing repository tonight. Please install them and let Aaron, Jason, or I know if you find any problems. Highlights: * Two new scripts to assist with chroot creation and builds * extrapkg now takes an -l argument to limit the scp upload bandwidth (Andy, please test) -Dan

4 7

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] usbutils -4
by Tobias Powalowski 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

Hi http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8464 , please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 1

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] glibc,tzdata,binutils,gcc,gcc-libs
by Andreas Radke 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

not one issue so far related to the glibc bump. luckily this thread http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=39084 kept unused. please sign off glibc, tzdata, binutils, gcc, gcc-libs. Andy

3 4

[arch-dev-public] request: move sudo to base-devel
by Roman Kyrylych 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

Right now sudo is in Extra. I request to move it to Core/base-devel because it is needed by makepkg to be used by user (which is the right way). -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

6 10

[arch-dev-public] Logo -- Concerns over developer entries.
by James Rayner 31 Oct '07

31 Oct '07

Forwarding on some concerns over entries by developers in the logo competition. I havn't made an official entry, but I have been taking ideas on some designs, with the intention of an official entry after development. http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptAB.png http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptC.png http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptD.png To quote: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=294343#p294343 " Finally, I have a more logistical concern about your potential submission. Rules have been laid out that devs will be the ones doing the initial vote on the logo, and the community only votes in the case of a tie. You submitting as a developer flags as an overt conflict of interest. Regardless of whether you vote or not on your design, you have no way to assure the community that nepotism won't come into play in the logo decision, if you submit. This will discourage others from submitting as they will all be starting at a SIGNIFICANT disadvantage as a decision maker will be creating a design of their own. If the developers wanted to create their own logo, they should not have ordained a community contest to have a logo created. I'm hoping all developers can appreciate this point of view. " So two points: - Conflict of interest, easily solved - Favouritism. Thoughts? James

8 8