On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:

On Saturday 13 June 2009 12:55:46 Pierre Schmitz wrote:

...

Added hack to remove rpath; see http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15083

a signoff for x86_64 would be nice.

Am I missing something? dmcgee@galway /tmp $ pacman -Ss xzutils dmcgee@galway /tmp $

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Allan McRae wrote:

Dan McGee wrote:

...

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:

...

On Saturday 13 June 2009 12:55:46 Pierre Schmitz wrote:

...

Added hack to remove rpath; see http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15083

a signoff for x86_64 would be nice.

Am I missing something?

dmcgee@galway /tmp $ pacman -Ss xzutils

Yes, a hyphen...

The subject was rather misleading then. :)

Pierre Schmitz schrieb:

On Saturday 13 June 2009 12:55:46 Pierre Schmitz wrote:

...

Added hack to remove rpath; see http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15083

a signoff for x86_64 would be nice.

Signoff x86_64 (btw, the kernel you are regularly booting is compressed using lzma from this package). But what about this: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2009-May/011799.html bsdtar seems to do something weird here.

Xavier schrieb:

...

But what about this: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2009-May/011799.html bsdtar seems to do something weird here.

Does this have anything to do with this : http://code.google.com/p/libarchive/issues/detail?id=30 ?

this issue will be fixed in 2.7.1 (not yet released) : http://code.google.com/p/libarchive/wiki/ReleaseNotes

otherwise you should probably open another ticket there :)

It seems to be that ticket, we'll see. Unfortunately, I cannot access the source and history right now as they are using google code, which seems to be very slow.