[arch-dev-public] [signoff] initscripts-2011.04.1-2
Hi guys, A new initscripts package is in testing, please test and signoff. The only change since -1 is that we now have a versioned dependency on udev>=167. I suggest putting a note on the frontpage: **************************** New initscripts removes legacy code, requires up-to-date packages As of initscripts 2011.04.1 we expect all other packages (except for the kernel) to be up-to-date. This in particular includes udev, mdadm, dmraid, lvm. Some highlights from the changelog: * We now let udev deal with mdadm, and no longer call mdadm explicitly * We now strongly discourage the use of HWCLOCK="localtime", as this may lead to several known and unfixable bugs * The adjustment of the hwclock for drift is moved into a daemon that should not be used in most scenarios as it can lead to subtle bugs (especially if using dual-boot or ntp) New features: * a new binary, /sbin/rc, that allows to start/stop and list daemons * support FakeRAID (dmraid) * support btrfs
[2011-04-29 02:33:57 +0200] Tom Gundersen:
A new initscripts package is in testing, please test and signoff.
Signoff x86_64.
I suggest putting a note on the frontpage:
****************************
New initscripts removes legacy code, requires up-to-date packages
As of initscripts 2011.04.1 we expect all other packages (except for the kernel) to be up-to-date. This in particular includes udev, mdadm, dmraid, lvm.
Some highlights from the changelog:
* We now let udev deal with mdadm, and no longer call mdadm explicitly * We now strongly discourage the use of HWCLOCK="localtime", as this may lead to several known and unfixable bugs * The adjustment of the hwclock for drift is moved into a daemon that should not be used in most scenarios as it can lead to subtle bugs (especially if using dual-boot or ntp)
New features: * a new binary, /sbin/rc, that allows to start/stop and list daemons * support FakeRAID (dmraid) * support btrfs
Sounds good to me, although the expectation for users not to cherry pick upgrades is not limited to initscripts. Cheers. -- Gaetan
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 5:11 PM, Gaetan Bisson <bisson@archlinux.org> wrote:
Sounds good to me, although the expectation for users not to cherry pick upgrades is not limited to initscripts.
Apparently some have considered the low-level packages to be an exception. I just wanted to point out that that is not the case. Maybe it could be formulated better...? -t
[2011-04-30 17:20:44 +0200] Tom Gundersen:
Apparently some have considered the low-level packages to be an exception.
Hum. As far as I recall, people who don't do `pacman -Syu` have always been on their own.
Maybe it could be formulated better...?
Nah, it's okay as it is. I meant my remark as a general one. Cheers. -- Gaetan
One typo: [2011-04-29 02:33:57 +0200] Tom Gundersen:
* a new binary, /sbin/rc, that allows to start/stop and list daemons
You probably meant script/executable instead of binary here. -- Gaetan
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Gaetan Bisson <bisson@archlinux.org> wrote:
[2011-04-29 02:33:57 +0200] Tom Gundersen:
* a new binary, /sbin/rc, that allows to start/stop and list daemons
You probably meant script/executable instead of binary here.
Yes. It should have been "a new script". -t
Am 29.04.2011 02:33, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
Hi guys,
A new initscripts package is in testing, please test and signoff.
The only change since -1 is that we now have a versioned dependency on udev>=167.
Signoff x86_64. Can we move this and mkinitcpio today?
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 29.04.2011 02:33, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
Hi guys,
A new initscripts package is in testing, please test and signoff.
The only change since -1 is that we now have a versioned dependency on udev>=167.
Signoff x86_64. Can we move this and mkinitcpio today?
Fine with me, but I believe we lack i686 signoffs for initscripts. How about the announcement on the frontpage, should that go up first? Who do I ask to do that? Cheers, Tom
Am 02.05.2011 14:43, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 29.04.2011 02:33, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
Hi guys,
A new initscripts package is in testing, please test and signoff.
The only change since -1 is that we now have a versioned dependency on udev>=167.
Signoff x86_64. Can we move this and mkinitcpio today?
Fine with me, but I believe we lack i686 signoffs for initscripts.
Didn't check, i686 anyone?
How about the announcement on the frontpage, should that go up first? Who do I ask to do that?
Let ioni set you up with a developer login if you don't have one yet. If you have one and lack permissions to post news, ioni can handle that too. (I hope I am not mistaken, but I think he manages the archweb users these days)
On 05/02/2011 03:48 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
Am 02.05.2011 14:43, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Thomas Bächler<thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 29.04.2011 02:33, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
Hi guys,
A new initscripts package is in testing, please test and signoff.
The only change since -1 is that we now have a versioned dependency on udev>=167.
Signoff x86_64. Can we move this and mkinitcpio today?
Fine with me, but I believe we lack i686 signoffs for initscripts.
Didn't check, i686 anyone?
here is one. signoff i686
How about the announcement on the frontpage, should that go up first? Who do I ask to do that?
Let ioni set you up with a developer login if you don't have one yet. If you have one and lack permissions to post news, ioni can handle that too. (I hope I am not mistaken, but I think he manages the archweb users these days)
ioni can do it :) ps. tom still can't move packages to core. -- Ionuț
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Ionut Biru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
here is one. signoff i686
Signoff both.
Am 02.05.2011 14:52, schrieb Ionut Biru:
Let ioni set you up with a developer login if you don't have one yet. If you have one and lack permissions to post news, ioni can handle that too. (I hope I am not mistaken, but I think he manages the archweb users these days)
ioni can do it :)
ps. tom still can't move packages to core.
I will move the packages once Tom posted the news for initscripts.
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
I will move the packages once Tom posted the news for initscripts.
Done. -t
Am 02.05.2011 20:39, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
I will move the packages once Tom posted the news for initscripts.
Done.
-t
And done. Thanks for your great work so far, let's see how your first release works out. I am also glad to see that the number of constant contributors is increasing.
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
And done.
Thanks!
Thanks for your great work so far, let's see how your first release works out.
Fingers crossed!
I am also glad to see that the number of constant contributors is increasing.
Yes, the increasing activity is very promising. I think the mailinglist helped a lot. Cheers, Tom
participants (5)
-
Gaetan Bisson
-
Ionut Biru
-
Jan Steffens
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Tom Gundersen