March 2022 - Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] RFC: Forbid dummy packages from AUR
by Óscar García Amor 04 Apr '22

04 Apr '22

El jue, 24 mar 2022 a las 8:14, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public (<arch-dev-public(a)lists.archlinux.org>) escribió: > > On 24/3/22 11:07, Brett Cornwall via arch-dev-public wrote: > > Summary: Reject AUR packages that fulfill package dependencies without > > providing the files/binaries of the package in question. But why? I don't quite understand why this should be banned. IMHO I think it is something very interesting and also, as described in the RFC, has a clear and justified use. It would be different if there was a way to tell Pacman by configuration to assume that these dependencies are covered, but as far as I know it is not possible. And while it is true that you can pass the `--assume-installed` option to it, but that must always be done at run time and if you have a high number of dummy dependencies it can be messy. Greetings -- Óscar García Amor | ogarcia at moire.org | http://ogarcia.me

3 3

[arch-general] Vim errors: Can't allocate color Orange, Can't allocate color SlateBlue, etc...
by David C. Rankin 01 Apr '22

01 Apr '22

All, A recent change to how vim is being packages has resulted in errors when opening files with C syntax highlight on my system. The error I receive is, e.g.: Error detected while processing /etc/vimrc[38]../usr/share/vim/vim82/syntax/syntax.vim[19]../usr/share/vim/vim82/syntax/synload.vim[21]../usr/share/vim/vim82/syntax/syncolor.vim: line 53: E254: Cannot allocate color SlateBlue E254: Cannot allocate color SlateBlue I get the same error with different colors depending on what different highlight elements are present in any file. Was the vim package changed to put this stuff in another package? Odd error -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

2 1

[arch-general] Status of gnupg - time to update
by Genes Lists 28 Mar '22

28 Mar '22

Current Arch version is LTS 2.2.32 [1]. As per the announcement [2] 2.3.4 is considered the current stable version: "Version 2.3 is the current stable version with a lot of new features compared to 2.2." I have hazy recollections from some time back that there was a reason for delaying updating to current version - don't recall what exactly. It's been a while now, and there are some nice features in 2.3.4 [3] Also, our libgcrypt is up to date ( ignoring today's release of 1.10.1) Any remaining reason not to update gnupg to current version? thanks gene [1] Aside - LTS 2.3.34 was released recently in early Feb of this year. [2] https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce/2022q1/000470.html [3] https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce/2021q2/000458.html

1 0

[arch-general] Pacman Search on Package Names Only?
by 2QdxY4RzWzUUiLuE＠potatochowder.com 25 Mar '22

25 Mar '22

Greetings, Is there a way to limit Pacman to search package names only, rather than package names and descriptions? https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Pacman#Querying_package_databases says that you can do that by tweaking the search term, but that doesn't really work. As a [horrible] workaround, I could write my own script atop pacman -Qq, but, well, yuck. :-) Thanks, Dan

2 2

[arch-general] Output of make -s kernelrelease has a "" suffix
by u34＠net9.ga 23 Mar '22

23 Mar '22

With 5.17.arch1, the output of make -s kernelrelease ends with "". That is, having a double \" character at the end of the string. It was not like that in prevoius versions. Is that expected? -- u34

2 2

[arch-general] Atheros AR9462 - kernel upgrade warning
by Danila Kiver 21 Mar '22

21 Mar '22

A little heads up for Atheros AR9462 owners. It seems that the latest kernel renders AR9462 (and maybe some other cards using ath9k module) WiFi close to unusable due to network connection being dropped continuously. The problem seems to be not Arch-specific; there is an upstream report for this: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215698 Upgrade with caution; keep old kernel package cached. Rolling back to linux-5.16.3 worked well for me. Regards, Danila Kiver.

2 2

[arch-general] FS#73728 - Installing mandoc uninstalls certain doc-only packages (dependency issue)
by Kelvin M. Klann 08 Mar '22

08 Mar '22

Greetings. Some packages are currently affected by Arch bug FS#73728[1]. It seems that not all of the relevant package maintainers were added to the bug report, so I figured that I'd send the bug status to a mailing list and copy whoever is missing. I'm not sure if this is relevant to arch-dev-public, so I'm sending it to arch-general. Apologies if it's not the correct list. Here's a partial quoting of the issue[1]: > Both man-db and mandoc provide "man" and also conflict with each other. > > And there are documentation-only packages which depend on "man-db" rather > than on just "man". > > This prevents installing both mandoc (instead of man-db) and these > documentation-only packages at the same time. > > Note: "man-db" provides only man(1) and related tools; the "default" man > pages themselves are provided by "man-pages". Suggested fix: Change all of the following packages to depend on "man" rather than on "man-db": * man-pages-zh_cn * man-pages-zh_tw * man2html * xorg-docs Note: The following packages were already fixed[2][3]: * bat-extras * man-pages-cs * man-pages-da * man-pages-de * man-pages-es * man-pages-fr * man-pages-hu * man-pages-it * man-pages-mk * man-pages-nl * man-pages-pl * man-pages-pt_br * man-pages-ro Note2: In the case of man2html, it does not call man(1); you have to call it yourself and pass the output to man2html. From man2html(1): > Typical Usage: > > man2html[-options] < infile > outfile > > man topic | man2html [-options] > outfile I have tested it with both man-db and mandoc: $ yes | sudo pacman -Sdd man-db >/dev/null 2>&1 $ man /usr/share/man/man1/tr.1.gz | man2html >tr_mandb.1.html $ yes | sudo pacman -Sdd mandoc >/dev/null 2>&1 $ man /usr/share/man/man1/tr.1.gz | man2html >tr_mandoc.1.html The main difference that I noticed was that with man-db, everything is put inside a pre tag, while with mandoc it uses h2, b and pre tags for each section. So the output looks different, but at least the main content is present on both. Package versions: * coreutils 9.0-2 * man-db 2.10.1-1 * mandoc 1.14.6-1 Cheers, Kelvin [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/73728 [2] https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/commit/c4d5698c9f031547039a… [3] https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/commit/c79b07ccfa1389d58bb6…

1 0

[arch-general] Use Grub with Preloader
by Giovanni Santini 04 Mar '22

04 Mar '22

Hi all, I was reinstalling Arch after an unlucky SDD wipe due to warranty. I reinstalled Arch and then proceeded to use Secure Boot via Preloader. I followed the steps at: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface/Secu… But I got an error from Grub saying: *error: verification requested but nobody cares* I decided to re-create the Grub binary with the TPM module via *grub-install --target=x86_64-efi --efi-directory=ESP_DIR --modules="tpm" --bootloader-id=BOOTLOADER* But that didn't do the trick. Do I have to do something peculiar in order to make Grub to work? Bests, -- Giovanni Santini Telegram: @ItachiSan Github: https://github.com/ItachiSan LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/giovanni-santini/ Facebook: https://fb.me/giovanni.santini

2 4