On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Eric Belanger wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Dan McGee wrote:

...

Pacman 3.2.0 is in testing for i686. Please signoff. Changes outlined here: http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=blob;f=NEWS

When building mythbrowser, I noticed that makepkg now fails when there is an '?' in the sources, e.g. source=("http://www.mythtv.org/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=136&foo=/mythplugins-$pkgver.tar.bz2")

Removing the double quotes and escaping the characters doesn't work.

The error message:

==> ERROR: There is no agent set up to handle URLs. Check /etc/makepkg.conf. Aborting...

Not a showstopper as the source can be downloaded maunally in the build dir. I'll try to look into it further tomorrow.

We have a regression here, and it is actually bigger than it looks at first sight. Can you file a bug report for this? Tracing the code shows that %o and %u are never even used right now, as they don't make it all the way through to the download stage. -Dan

On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, Dan McGee wrote:

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Eric Belanger wrote:

...

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Dan McGee wrote:

...

Pacman 3.2.0 is in testing for i686. Please signoff. Changes outlined here: http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=blob;f=NEWS

When building mythbrowser, I noticed that makepkg now fails when there is an '?' in the sources, e.g. source=("http://www.mythtv.org/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=136&foo=/mythplugins-$pkgver.tar.bz2")

Removing the double quotes and escaping the characters doesn't work.

The error message:

==> ERROR: There is no agent set up to handle URLs. Check /etc/makepkg.conf. Aborting...

Not a showstopper as the source can be downloaded maunally in the build dir. I'll try to look into it further tomorrow.

So did we get any signoffs here? I am aware of a few regressions that we have patches available for and will be fixed in a soon-to-come 3.2.1 release, but I don't believe either of them are absolute showstoppers: 1. The above makepkg ? URL regression. http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=commit;h=9bc799ec7b1718e6d90ce... 2. local mirror behavior with display and trailing slashes. http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=commit;h=4476598e4e128f4595d53..., http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=commit;h=72c5a298a3ee0f1801901... 3. The manpages were incorrectly built/included, although they should be close to up to date, they simply include a git version number. (d'oh! me again). http://archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2008-August/012739.html

Anyone want to signoff?

-Dan

OK then. Signoff for both arches. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

Signoff (i686) -- Hugo

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Andreas Radke wrote:

Is there a certain reason why pacman.static has been removed? I used it a lot when playing with glibc upgrades that often break the dynamic pacman. Is there any replacement?

It also ended up being pretty useful when pacman started linking against libarchive and libdownload (libfetch?), IIRC - of course, that was compounded by a pacman issue (it didn't download its own deps when upgrading itself) that has since been fixed.

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Andreas Radke wrote:

Am Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:44:22 -0500 schrieb "Dan McGee" :

...

Pacman 3.2.0 is in testing for i686. Please signoff. Changes outlined here: http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=blob;f=NEWS

Can someone build it for x86_64? Thanks.

On a side note, I'm gone for most of this upcoming weekend, so you may want to wait until next week to move this to core even if it has the requisite signoffs unless you guys want to put out any fires.

-Dan

Is there a certain reason why pacman.static has been removed? I used it a lot when playing with glibc upgrades that often break the dynamic pacman. Is there any replacement?

Can you back up this claim? If you uninstall glibc, you are f**ked. pacman.static (and every other binary on your system minus those statically linked against klibc) will not run. I know this from doing it by accident on my Eee. :) If someone wants to do a "replacement", feel free. Let me know who wants to maintain the pacman package and build it in the PKGBUILD. I really have no desire to both hack on the code and package it for Arch- I see them as two completely different things. Travis did in fact find the thread where this all came up on pacman-dev and no one had complaints against it from that side of the fence: http://archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2008-July/012348.html -Dan

On Sat, Aug 02, 2008 at 11:44:11AM +0200, Andreas Radke wrote:

Am Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:44:22 -0500 schrieb "Dan McGee" :

...

Pacman 3.2.0 is in testing for i686. Please signoff. Changes outlined here: http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=blob;f=NEWS

Can someone build it for x86_64? Thanks.

On a side note, I'm gone for most of this upcoming weekend, so you may want to wait until next week to move this to core even if it has the requisite signoffs unless you guys want to put out any fires.

-Dan

Pacman fails now often to fetch packages from my local mirror though the files are present there:

[root@workstation64 /]# LANG=C pacman -Syu :: Synchronizing package databases... testing is up to date core is up to date extra is up to date

Installing packages from local repo works OK here, but the synchronising of the local repo doesnt print any output on screen like the rest. Just like it can be seen in andyrtr's mail above.