August 2008 - Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] speakers don't turn off when headphones inserted
by Scott Weisman 03 Jun '09

03 Jun '09

Hello, I just obtained a Fujitsu P7120 notebook (a very nice model, by the way). Overall, I am getting this working with Arch just fine (although I would definitely appreciate pointers from anyone else who has installed Arch, especially as I have been using a desktop until now and haven't had the need to configure notebook-type features). One problem I am having that I don't know how to fix is that when I plug in headphones, the speakers don't turn off. Alsamixer shows that the headphones and speakers have separate controls, something I have never seen in a notebook before. While cool, I would really love to have this automatically toggle as expected. Does anyone have a suggestion? Thanks, Scott

5 4

[arch-general] (no subject)
by Agus Setiawan 30 Mar '09

30 Mar '09

-- Regards, Agus Setiawan http://mysetiawan.net

5 4

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Multilib on Archlinux x86_64
by RedShift 15 Oct '08

15 Oct '08

Thomas Bächler wrote: > Andreas Radke schrieb: >> You must have mixed the mailing lists! > > Actually, no. > >> Arch64 was founded to never have support for 32bit compatibilty. So >> move this into the community/AUR list. > > Yeah, maybe, and I am extending it. > >> I give you a strict -1 for any 32bit compat stuff in our officially >> supported repos as I already told you in private discussions. I've >> spent several weeks if not even months to make it as clean as possible. > > What you are saying is that by adding an extra capability (again, > separate repository, nothing to pollute core or extra in any way), we > destroy the clean-ness of your so clean (and yeah, it is clean) system. > That's just irrational. > > The fact that you don't quote a single line from my posting tells me > that you haven't even read any of my propositions. Why don't you give > technical arguments instead of making this personal? > > The reason I want to maintain this on our ftp is that I want it to be > easily accessible to our devs and users, as I can't maintain it alone. > The reason I don't want this (at least the core of it) in community is > that I want it to be separate from the rest. > > Besides, unless you want to maintain the packages or use them by > activating the repository in pacman.conf, you won't even notice it's there. > >> It would be a reason for me to stepdown here! > > Now you're just being childish! > 100% agree with Andreas, again this is about principles. And I think Andreas has the same principles as me, either you go full x86-64 or you don't. A middle road is messy. If it were up to me the kernel wouldn't even have support for executing 32 bit stuff (right now that option is enabled). Glenn

2 1

[arch-general] Arch listed as option in virtualbox
by David Rosenstrauch 03 Sep '08

03 Sep '08

Looks like Arch is now listed as an "OS type" choice in virtualbox. Cool! (Maybe it was already; I just noticed it today though.) DR

5 6

[arch-general] Outdated Wicd
by Christian Babeux 01 Sep '08

01 Sep '08

Hi, It seems that the version of wicd in extra (version 1.4.1) is outdated and has currently no maintainer. The new version (version 1.5.x) is moved from /usr/lib/wicd to respect FHS and add interesting new features. There is also a svn version in the AUR, but I don't think it is stable enough to be in extra. So what are the plans for this package ?

4 5

[arch-general] archlinux in vmware server 2 beta in archlinux x86_64 systems
by Geoffroy Carrier 31 Aug '08

31 Aug '08

Hello! I'm more or less still working on providing x86_64+i686 virtual machines on a compilation machine to devs and TUs. Problem staying unresolved for days and days: the Arch Linux installation media kernel detects the VM as a 32 bits system. Does anyone have an experience with it? On a unrelated matter, I've been pretty busy and late in my work those days. I got back into meetings and it takes me a looot of time. Happily there will be quite less meetings from the second half of September, but then I'll be back in class and will have a team to build/manage. -- Geoffroy Carrier

2 2

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Cleaning up the base group
by Alessio Bolognino 31 Aug '08

31 Aug '08

On Fri 2008-08-29 23:42, Pierre Schmitz wrote: > Am Freitag 29 August 2008 12:27:50 schrieb Thomas Bächler: > > - nano Do we really need another editor in base? Let's leave it in > > core, remove it from base. > > This might end up in a flamwar, but if we have to remove one editor I > would vote vor vim and keep nano. [... more nonsense ] ||||||||| vvvvvvvvv ************* ======================> * THIS * <================================ ======================> * IS * <================================ ======================> * MADNESS! * <================================ ************* ^^^^^^^^^ ||||||||| :%s/Pierre Schmitz/Wuss Infidel/g :wq! -- Alessio (molok) Bolognino

10 13

[arch-general] Rebuild davfs2 from extra please
by Gerhard Brauer 31 Aug '08

31 Aug '08

Hello, davfs2 from extra is outdated. PKGBUILD must also be modified. Currently davfs2 is broken. I attached a PKGBUILD in bugreport: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/11285 Gerhard -- Die NASA brauchte 12 Jahre um einen Kugelschreiber zu entwickeln, der kopfueber, in der Schwerelosigkeit und unter Wasser schreiben kann. Die Russen benutzten einfach einen Bleistift...

1 0

[arch-general] /srv/ vs. /home/httpd/html
by Jon Kristian Nilsen 30 Aug '08

30 Aug '08

I know this change has been running for some time now, but out of curiousity i'd like to know why it's been descided to put phpmyadmin/apache stuff in a new root folder called /srv/ instead of /home/* Isn't this a very personal setup compared to having this in the already existing /home/ folder? And not to forget that the change created a great deal of extra work for users who has been using /home/.. /srv/ must have some hidden important stability boosts?? And please don't get me wrong, i don't really care, since i have most of these folders mounted the way i want them, im still going to rebuild these packages and more using abs. Im just curious... -JK

3 3

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Risky business: udev upgrade
by bardo 30 Aug '08

30 Aug '08

On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 1:45 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin(a)gmail.com> wrote: > start_udev is still there because people were jackasses and didn't > update initscripts when they updated udev.... or something.. I can't > remember the issue, but it was people being foolish and expecting > their systems to boot fine. > > Is everyone ok with removing it? Just remember to update /etc/udev/readme-udev-arch.txt: it still references start_udev as the way to reload rules, and it's also mentioned in another couple of places in that file. Corrado

2 1