[arch-dev-public] ISO Releaseplan 2008.03 now it's time to really create an ISO ; ), pending work and signoffs
Hi due to my work in february this one got somehow delayed so now the new plan for the 2008.03 ISOs: pending signoffs and move to base: cryptsetup dash filesystem findutils hdparm kernel26 klibc klibc-extras klibc-module-init-tools vi xfsprogs klibc-udev? bump to 118? along with the udev update 118 shouldn't we keep it in sync? udev? i think this should be done in next 2 days initscripts? bump to 2008.03 with the last changes from git and it would be good if aaron would add himself along with judd in rc.sysinit. mkinitcpio? do we need a new version to get init= syntax back? if yes we could fix this bug also: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9433 pending signoffs and move to support: iproute madwifi madwifi-utils rp-pppoe tiacx tiacx-firmware wpasupplicant fuse? Thomas is there an issue atm? netcfg? status of it? is it now ready to move in to core? kbd? Roman wanted to add some changes and additions to it, should be also soon fixed. delayed package moves due to rebuilds and issues: libtool perl Packages not mentioned in this mail are not included on new ISOs. If something real important is missing, tell it now. When this list is finished new ISOs will be created. Also feel free to read the installation documentation, if there is something that is not correct anymore or you would like to see changed. http://projects.archlinux.org/git/?p=installer.git;a=blob;f=arch-install-gui... Any other opinions on it? Thanks for your attention :) greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
Tobias Powalowski schrieb:
Hi due to my work in february this one got somehow delayed so now the new plan for the 2008.03 ISOs:
pending signoffs and move to base: cryptsetup
If I can signoff myself, then I could move it.
dash
Only a bugfix in the build process, should be movable.
klibc klibc-extras klibc-module-init-tools
I think they are fine
klibc-udev? bump to 118? along with the udev update 118 shouldn't we keep it in sync?
udev? i think this should be done in next 2 days
Aaron told me he had a -3 running fine on his system a few days ago, but I haven't heard from him since. He also said he'd update klibc-udev and adjust the scripts.
mkinitcpio? do we need a new version to get init= syntax back? if yes we could fix this bug also: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9433
Didn't look at that yet, in fact, I didn't look at it for quite some time.
pending signoffs and move to support: iproute
iproute seems fine here, though I only use 'ip'. There were some segfaults with lnstat, but I don't even know what lnstat does.
wpasupplicant
Fine here.
fuse? Thomas is there an issue atm?
There is a problem, which I refuse to fix, at least in the suggested way. http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9748
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:09 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Tobias Powalowski schrieb:
pending signoffs and move to support: iproute
iproute seems fine here, though I only use 'ip'. There were some segfaults with lnstat, but I don't even know what lnstat does.
I originally brought up the segfault, but the old version segfaulted too, so not much changed. :) You can consider me signed off if you want, as the 'ip' tool seems to be working fine. -Dan
On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 19:09 +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
fuse? Thomas is there an issue atm?
There is a problem, which I refuse to fix, at least in the suggested way. http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9748
That issue affects ntfs-3g, not fuse. Newer versions of ntfs-3g have this check, any version of fuse would have triggered that bug.
Jan de Groot schrieb:
On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 19:09 +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
fuse? Thomas is there an issue atm? There is a problem, which I refuse to fix, at least in the suggested way. http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9748
That issue affects ntfs-3g, not fuse. Newer versions of ntfs-3g have this check, any version of fuse would have triggered that bug.
Do you know more? What exactly is that security problem that is not present in his own built-in fuse?
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
mkinitcpio? do we need a new version to get init= syntax back?
This is a klibc issue, not a mkinitcpio issue. It's not a showstopper, so ignore it for now. I have a patch locally. It's trivial. If anyone cares, they just did the init= argument passing wrong in kinit, because debian uses run-init instead.
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dan McGee
-
Jan de Groot
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Tobias Powalowski