February 2010 - Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] Syncing the mirrors
by Benedikt Müller 09 Feb '10

09 Feb '10

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 We have a bit update today, and we see: The syncing process is not really good. So I suggest to change the procedure mirrorsyncs are done: We should have primary and secondary mirrors. When al.org is updated, the sync process of the primary mirrors should be started via ssh(or something similar). Then the primary mirrors start the sync process on the secondary mirrors via ssh. So the al.org server isn't overloaded and the mirrors are more up to date because of the push way. - -- Gruß, Benedikt -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAktlkM4ACgkQEbgIp8utRvBwAwCgiv9qBi/hEP5Xr447gHrauExn f5kAnAs7uzHXPIhz+Q+JnQAkwfJms2/T =6iqt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

21 46

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] openvpn 2.1.1-1
by Damjan Georgievski 09 Feb '10

09 Feb '10

>> Upstream update. >> > > Bump! Does not export the $route_net_gateway environment variable to my --up script. This is probably upstream bug, but still -- damjan

2 3

[arch-general] [signoff] kernel 2.6.32.8-1
by Tobias Powalowski 09 Feb '10

09 Feb '10

Hi guys, bump to latest bugfix version. Please signoff both arches, greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

1 0

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] rfkill 0.4-1
by Damjan Georgievski 09 Feb '10

09 Feb '10

>> Upstream update, please sign off. >> > Bump! seems to work fine on i686 tested with wifi and bluetooth (but it really needs a toggle operation) -- damjan

1 0

[arch-general] KMS again with 2.6.33?
by Sven-Hendrik Haase 09 Feb '10

09 Feb '10

I was wondering whether KMS would officially return with 2.6.33 since a lot of fixes have gone into it? Obviously there will be a lengthy testing series first. Is it currently planned to try KMS again with 2.6.33? -- Sven-Hendrik

4 8

[arch-general] Eben Moglen's view on mkisofs GPL (non-)compliance
by Xavier Chantry 09 Feb '10

09 Feb '10

I also hope this helps somehow. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Karl Berry via RT <licensing(a)fsf.org> Date: Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 1:42 AM Subject: [gnu.org #544172] Fwd: [arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit To: chantry.xavier(a)gmail.com Hello Xavier, Eben just sent me this summary of his discussion with Jörg Schilling on the subject of the cdrtools mkisofs. He said that it can be republished/posted anywhere. When/if you do that, please do so *in its entirety*. All too easy for things to be taken out of context, so let's at least get the full version out there. Hope this helps somehow. Thanks, karl(a)gnu.org Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 11:24:23 -0500 From: Eben Moglen In September 2008, I was asked by Mark Shuttleworth if I could help Canonical discuss with Jörg the measures necessary to include cdrtools in Ubuntu. I spoke to Jörg by phone at first to explain my role, and then by email. I reminded him in doing so that I had agreed with him about the acceptability of combining GPL'd code with a C-library under CDDL in order to make the Debian/GNU/OpenSolaris stack called Nexenta. (I believe this part of our conversation is the source of Jörg's mistaken statement that I somehow indicated that cdrtools is non-infringing, although the issue of the "system library exception" in GPLv2 is completely distinct from the problem presented by the CDDL-licensed libraries libscg and libschilly combined with GPL'd mkisofs in cdrtools.) After speaking to Jörg we began our review of the complete source of cdrtools, and soon verified that GPL compliance on mkisofs was broken. We told Jörg that as far as we could see he was the only copyright holder on the CDDL'd libraries, which he confirmed. In that case, I pointed out, he could give all the permission necessary to solve the problem, without any license changes: he simply needed to give permission as the relevant copyright holder on the CDDL's libraries for combination with mkisofs and distribution of the binary and source under the terms of GPL, without any additional restrictions. We drafted for him the thirty-nine words needed: "You are permitted to link or otherwise combine this library with the program mkisofs, which is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL). If You do, you may distribute the combined work under the terms of the GPL." Jörg disputed our analysis. He argued to us: (1) that the binary mkisofs is not derivative of the CDDL-licensed libraries because it merely links to them; and alternatively that (2) CDDL Section 3.6 ("Larger Works") permits the combination. He claimed to have German legal advice confirming him on point (1), but without regard to his German legal analysis, which differs from that of our German lawyers, the argument is incorrect as a matter of law, at least in the United States, and GPL'd mkisofs (whose copyright is at stake) is a US work to which US copyright law applies under the Berne Convention. As to his point (2), while CDDL Section 3.6 permits combination with code under other licenses, it nonetheless requires that "the requirements of this License are fulfilled for the [combined program]." Since it is impossible to observe certain requirements of the CDDL while simultaneously respecting the GPL's prohibition of additional restrictions (GPLv2 Section 6), the CDDL Section 3.6 permission is insufficient to allow the combination. Hence the permission we advised him to grant. Though Jörg continued to argue that he didn't *need* to grant the permission, he never explained why, in the face of opposing legal analysis on behalf of the copyright holders of mkisofs he didn't *want* to grant a harmless permission that would allow his work to be included in Canonical's Ubuntu distributions. After weeks of discussion and many hours of my time and the time of my associate Aaron Williamson, Mark Shuttleworth decided there was no point in further fruitless negotiation and I agreed. SFLC was not paid for its work by any party.

3 2

Re: [arch-general] A suggestion for the devs regarding rebuilds
by Nagy Gabor 09 Feb '10

09 Feb '10

Allan McRae wrote: >> With every big rebuilds we get new breakage stories. It seems like >> it's the norm nowadays rather than the exception. >> >> I am wondering if it's really only the users that are to blame.. or if >> Arch is also to blame. Or if Arch was supposed to be an elitist >> distribution and is victim of its success. >I think the answer to that is in the question: What did we do different >previously that resulted in far less of these issues? >My impression is that nothing has particularly change in terms of how >rebuilds are handled. If anything, the whole process has become a lot >more streamlined and cases of missing a package rebuild are now almost >non-existent. >So the cause must be... A change in user-base? Maybe just an increase in >user-base resulting in more people who think Arch should be done their >way and not the Arch way? Well, I think this viewpoint is too elitist... I am not sure that you should blame users who just read http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Font_Configuration#LCD_filter_patched_p… and who don't even know that cairo is a dependency of gtk2. (Come on, do you know well every installed library on your system?) And with broken cairo the user just gets "fav_gtk_app: error while loading shared libraries...", so it requires a little bit sophisticated bug-hunting. I just mention the "-Sy system_breaker_package" issue again, where sodepends or libpng14 could help. I know that these system breakages require some user fault too, but I think the main purpose of pacman (should be) to not allow break our system. If I accepted your standpoint as a solution, I would suggest to not use %CONFLICTS% array or versioned dependencies ;-) (Because "elite" users should know that foo conflicts with bar, and all his packages [dependencies] should be always up-to-date...) Bye

4 4

[arch-general] library version conflict -- how does Arch solve this ?
by fons＠kokkinizita.net 08 Feb '10

08 Feb '10

Hello all, Today I installed Latex (texlive). Doing this installed new versions of libpng and libjpeg, and this broke emacs, xv and gnuplot (and maybe others I haven't discovered yet). I was able to make xv work again by removing and re-installing it. This didn't help for emacs, but adding a symbolic link in /usr/lib (to the wrong library !!!) made it work again. But I've been unable to get gnuplot working again, and this is one of my most essential tools. So what's the Arch way to solve this ? I find it extremely strange that updating a library removes the original - never seen this on any other distro. Nor is there any need to do this. Ciao, -- FA O tu, che porte, correndo si ? E guerra e morte !

8 11

[arch-general] kde4 color-schemes posted at kde-look in the interim
by David C. Rankin 08 Feb '10

08 Feb '10

Guys, Just dropping a note that the BlackGold, DeepBlueGold, and DarkRedGold color-schemes that I'm working on packaging here were posted to kde-look.org as well. The urls are: (BlackGold) http://kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=119891 (DarkRedGold) http://kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=119848 (DeepBlueGold) http://kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=119887 Take a look if you are interested. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com

2 2

[arch-general] Problem with sa-update up when updating spamassassin
by David C. Rankin 08 Feb '10

08 Feb '10

Guys, I had a problem while updating spamassassin. Running the sa-update app as specified in the package dependencies results in a 404 error from the site the script attempts to connect to. Dunno if it's SA or if there was a type in the package concerning the URL. Here is the dependency and the result: (19/22) upgrading spamassassin [####################################################] 100% You must run 'sa-update' to install spam rules before use. For detailed upgrade notes, see: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/tags/spamassassin_current_rele… 23:49 archangel:~> sudo sa-update http: GET http://www.sa-update.pccc.com/903765.tar.gz request failed: 404 Not Found: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <TITLE>404 Not Found</TITLE> </HEAD><BODY> <H1>Not Found</H1> The requested URL /903765.tar.gz was not found on this server.<P> <HR> <ADDRESS>Apache/1.3.41 Server at www.sa-update.pccc.com Port 80</ADDRESS> </BODY></HTML> The site itself is there, but has no index and denies browsing. Just thought I would pass it along. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com

1 0