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

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] rt2x00-cvs
by Tobias Powalowski 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

Hi rt2x00-cvs for both arches in testing, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 2

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] rt2500
by Tobias Powalowski 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

Hi kernel 2.6.23 for both arches in testing, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 2

[arch-dev-public] AUFS Patches in Kernel
by Paul Mattal 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

All, I would like to request the addition of the attached patch to the kernel PKGBUILD, to allow maintenance of an aufs package. Aufs is a rewrite of unionfs, with different strengths and weaknesses. The particular strength that makes it compelling is that it handles NFS filesystems as branches of a merged filesystem both correctly and with stability. This allows you to efficiently create diskless workstations where each client sees his own writeable root filesystem based off of a single filesystem image. The impact is two small patches which need to be added to the kernel, each of which exposes a small number of kernel function calls which are needed by aufs. I would appreciate if others would consider this and sign off. Having these patches in the kernel would make us fully aufs-friendly. I have attached the PKGBUILD patch against the current testing 2.6.13.1 kernel, as well as the two patches for your easy perusal. Best, Paul

6 11

[arch-dev-public] NEW RELEASE NAME SUMMARY/VOTING:
by Tobias Powalowski 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

NEW RELEASE NAME: - Hardcore (Roman - All you can Wuerstchen (Alex - Pizza (Thomas - Slice (Damir - Proton - Magma - Core Dump (Aaron, Tpowa I think that are enough, Voting till sunday evening european time should be fine. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

8 8

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] iwlwifi
by Tobias Powalowski 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

Hi iwlwifi for both arches in testing, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

3 2

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] sudo in testing
by Paul Mattal 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

I have adopted sudo, and placed the newest version in testing. This version returns to the upstream default of not insulting you when you get your password wrong, except if you actually enable this in /etc/sudoers. Given that Arch is a multi-purpose distro that is used in many settings (e.g. my office), this seems more appropriate. Those wishing the verbal abuse can still set the insults option in /etc/sudoers. Because this is a significant package, I would appreciate it if at least one dev would sign off before I move it to [extra]. Thanks! - P

4 3

[arch-dev-public] Repo Distinctions
by Paul Mattal 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

So I've been listening to the discussion about what should and shouldn't be in extra so far, and I've come to the following conclusions: 1) Niche is subjective. 2) Even if it weren't, whether a package is "niche" or "mainstream" is not a good criterion for classifying it in one repo or another. 3) Some good criteria for classifying packages in one repo or another are: a) Desire to maintain a package long-term. b) Association with a particular group of people you trust. 4) There are many who actually do trust developers more than TUs. This is not intended as a judgement, rather as an observation. My feeling is that we should have under the developer umbrella a split of the existing [extra] into two repos: [main] - to be in the main repo, a package must be voted in by a majority of the developers; we commit to maintaining these packages over a long period of time, and announce 6-12 months in advance if we're going to remove them (and again, this removal requires a majority vote); there should never be any orphans in here, and we should be extremely stingy about putting packages in here in the first place [extra] - developers can maintain any packages in here they wish; if they decide to orphan them, they must announce that to the developers and TUs and see if anyone wants to take them on; if nobody wants them, they get demoted and orphaned in unsupported so that the community can still benefit from the work they once did This is just a proposal intended as a starting point for discussion. But I think some notion of a supported group of [main] packages that we collectively commit to maintaining will make us feel less bad about a more in-flux [extra]. Also, a clear process about what you do when you orphan a package helps get those packages picked up by those with time or inclination to deal with them. For those who would say: why not just use [community] as the [extra] you're proposing above? The answer: so you can tell which group of individuals is standing behind these packages-- the developers. With that information, you can then decide for yourself who to trust. - P

8 32

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.23.1
by Tobias Powalowski 19 Oct '07

19 Oct '07

Hi kernel 2.6.23 for both arches in testing, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

11 10

[arch-dev-public] new release name?
by Tobias Powalowski 18 Oct '07

18 Oct '07

Ok seems this was overseeen in my previous mail: NEW RELEASE NAME: - Hardcore - All you can wuerstchen throw in new suggestions or vote +1 fot the name you like. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

10 10

[arch-dev-public] Unbotched PKGBUILD patch
by Paul Mattal 18 Oct '07

18 Oct '07

The first PKGBUILD patch was slightly botched (in the process of minimizing the diff). New version attached. - P

1 0