- Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] Nvidia/vesafb/GRUB2
by Arno Gaboury 01 Jul '12

01 Jul '12

dear list, After a few months of running Arch, I am now fine tuning everything (or at least trying). I discovered this error message in *kernel.log* file. NVRM: Your system is not currently configured to drive a VGA console NVRM: on the primary VGA device. The NVIDIA Linux graphics driver NVRM: requires the use of a text-mode VGA console. Use of other console NVRM: drivers including, but not limited to, vesafb, may result in NVRM: corruption and stability problems, and is not supported. Googling let me to many forum posts about this issue with Nvidia card and driver, but I couldn't find any clear answer. I have tried all the cited tricks in my *grub* file: -add *vga=0*, or *vga=795* (1208x1024), or *video=visa:off vga=normal* -*GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=console*, *GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=text*, *GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep* and whatever else I couldn't remember, but nothing changed about this message. As far as I understand, Nvidia does NOT support vesa framebuffer, but only vga. Fine. My system is NOT using VGA console. Fine. But how do I need ton configure my *grub* file ? Here are the concerned line from my file : *GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="" GRUB_TERMINAL_INPUT=console GRUB_TERMINAL_OUTPUT=console GRUB_GFXMODE=1280x1024 GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=1280x1024* Please help as keeping running X like this is not recommanded. TY.

8 26

[arch-general] Documentation about pambase
by Damjan 30 Jun '12

30 Jun '12

It's nice that Arch introduced the pambase package, so that there's some referent point of pam configuration. But currently it lacks any documentation and recommendations how those files should be used (for people that it's not so obvious). Especially something we can point to people making packages on AUR. For ex. what should lightdm use? just include /etc/pam.d/system-login or /etc/pam.d/system-local-login? -- дамјан

1 0

[arch-general] skype - problem with audio playback when initiating call
by David C. Rankin 30 Jun '12

30 Jun '12

Guys, I've been through the wiki, but this weird skype error occurs when attempting to make a voip voice call. The defaults set in skype "Sound Services" were: Microphone: Default device (default) Speakers: Intel ICH6, Intel ICH6 - IEC958 (hw:0,4) Ringing: Intel ICH6, Intel ICH6 - IEC958 (hw:0,4) However pressing "Make a test sound" - there is NO sound. I can place a call, but there is no ringing audio, etc. If I change the config to: Microphone: Default device (default) Speakers: pulse (pulse) Ringing: pulse (pulse) Pressing "Make a test sound" -- works! But, attempting to make a call, I get an immediate "Problem with Audio Playback" and the call closes. I have set ~/.pulse/client.conf to "autospawn = no" and it make no difference. Any ideas? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

2 3

[arch-general] netcfg - virtual network on a loopback interface
by Sudaraka Wijesinghe 30 Jun '12

30 Jun '12

Hi Everyone, I was using a virtual network within my computer to run a web server for development work. Following is the way it setup: /etc/network.d/vlan CONNECTION='ethernet' DESCRIPTION='Virtual LAN' INTERFACE='lo:1' IP='static' ADDR='192.168.123.1' GATEWAY='192.168.123.1' NETMASK='255.255.255.0' Then I have valn in the NETWORKS array in /etc/conf.d/netcfg and, net-profiles in the DAEMONS array in /etc/rc.conf Everything was working fine until the netcfg package update yesterday, and since then it fails to find/create the loopback interface. I get the followin error at boot and when I run netcfg manually. /usr/lib/network/network: line 364: /sys/class/net/lo:1/flags: No such file or directory (x6) /usr/lib/network/globals: line 104: /sys/class/net/lo:1/carrier: No such file or directory (x6) ** (x6) means I get 6 of the same message Can anyone please give me a pointer how to solve this? Thanks. -- Sudaraka Wijesinghe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- identica/twitter | im/email | text/voice @sudaraka | sudaraka.wijesinghe(a)gmail.com | +94777221779

1 0

[arch-general] update of chroot fails - error: cannot remove file '/sys/': Read-only file system
by David C. Rankin 30 Jun '12

30 Jun '12

Guys, Attempting to update an arch chroot (only a couple days old), I have run into the following error: sudo mkarchroot -u $CHROOT/root :: Synchronizing package databases... core is up to date extra is up to date community is up to date local is up to date :: Starting full system upgrade... resolving dependencies... looking for inter-conflicts... Targets (12): dbus-core-1.6.0-4 e2fsprogs-1.42.4-1 filesystem-2012.6-4 hwids-20120611-1 iproute2-3.4.0-2 iputils-20101006-3 kmod-9-1 libsystemd-185-2 libusbx-1.0.12-1 linux-3.4.4-2 systemd-tools-185-2 xz-5.0.4-1 Total Installed Size: 71.36 MiB Net Upgrade Size: 0.49 MiB Proceed with installation? [Y/n] (12/12) checking package integrity [#######################################] 100% (12/12) loading package files [#######################################] 100% (12/12) checking for file conflicts [#######################################] 100% error: cannot remove file '/sys/': Read-only file system error: could not commit transaction error: failed to commit transaction (transaction aborted) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. How do I fix this? Is this another filesystem update issue like with filesystem-2012.6-2? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

4 7

[arch-general] Pacman behaviour comparing numerical versions for package upgrades
by Myra Nelson 29 Jun '12

29 Jun '12

I have a question about pacman's behaviour regarding packges to be updated. According to < $: man pacman > You can also use pacman -Su to upgrade all packages that are out of date. See Sync Options below. When upgrading, pacman performs version comparison to determine which packages need upgrading. Alphanumeric: 1.0a < 1.0b < 1.0beta < 1.0p < 1.0pre < 1.0rc < 1.0 < 1.0.a < 1.0.1 Numeric: 1 < 1.0 < 1.1 < 1.1.1 < 1.2 < 2.0 < 3.0.0 That's very clear and makes sense. Here's where I'm confused. I build some of my perl pacakges with cpanpkgbuild -f XXX::XXX::YYY. The package from the official repos is: perl-datetime-format-strptime-1.5000-1-any.pkg.tar.xz the package I built is: perl-datetime-format-strptime-1.51-1-any.pkg.tar.xz I'm used to the warning package ??? local is newer than extra ???. But with the above referenced package I had to list it in the [ IgnorePkg ] line to keep pacman from trying to upgrade the package and still get this warning. "Ignoring upgrade from perl-datetime-format-strptime from 1.51-1 to 1.5000-1" No complaints as it's easy to fix, I was just wondering about the reasoning. I'll jump out on a limb here and assume it's because the repo package has 4 digits then the package version after the decimal point and my package has two digits then the package version after the decimal point. The developer changed his numbering scheme after 1.5000 to 1.51. Is this the correct behaviour for pacman? -- Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!

7 11

[arch-general] wake from suspend to ram
by G. Schlisio 29 Jun '12

29 Jun '12

Hi all, on my laptop i want do disable wakeup from suspend to ram by pressing any key on my keyboard. i digged around and found it must be toggled in /proc/acpi/wakeup, still i cant find any documentation about that. my /proc/acpi/wakeup looks like this Device S-state Status Sysfs node LID0 S3 *enabled SLPB S3 *enabled HDEF S3 *disabled pci:0000:00:1b.0 PXSX S5 *disabled pci:0000:02:00.0 USB1 S3 *enabled pci:0000:00:1d.0 USB2 S3 *enabled pci:0000:00:1d.1 USB3 S3 *enabled pci:0000:00:1d.2 EHC1 S3 *enabled pci:0000:00:1d.7 but i dont now which entry is mykeyboard. i would just try to find out, but i cant fgure out a way, to toggle entries to disabled. anyone got a clue? georg

2 1

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] grub/grub2 final
by Keshav P R 28 Jun '12

28 Jun '12

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Ionut Biru <ibiru(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > On 06/24/2012 10:51 PM, Ronald van Haren wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Tobias Powalowski >> <tobias.powalowski(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >>> HI >>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2012-06/msg00071.html >>> grub2 will hit final status soon, should packages be renamed then? >>> Any plan how to handle this. >>> Imho we move grub-legacy to aur or at least extra then. >>> >>> Thanks >>> greetings >>> tpowa >>> >>> -- >>> Tobias Powalowski >>> Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) >>> http://www.archlinux.org >>> tpowa(a)archlinux.org >>> >>> >> >> I was about to post a similar message... >> >> Anyway, I was planning to drop support of grub1. There has been no >> upstream for a long time and all newer features are patched in or >> require additional patches. I don't see a need to have it in [extra] >> as grub-legacy. No problem uploading it to AUR so people can continue >> to use it if they want, although you need i686 to build it so that >> could be the only reason to keep it in [extra] for a bit... >> >> I've seen no major breakages in grub2 since beta2 iirc. Upstream >> development has been going towards stability in recent betas and I >> would consider it stable at the moment: there were no real bug reports >> in the bugtracker for the last few months. >> >> I'd like to move 2.00 to [core] via [testing] when it is released, >> letting the grub-bios (atm grub2-bios) replace the old grub package. >> Adding an install message and a news item is probably a good idea at >> the time. >> > > Do not replace grub. Most users won't read the pacman output and the > configuration syntax was changed, resulting in a non booting system. > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/GRUB#Generate_GRUB2_BIOS_Config_file . You can convert menu.lst/grub.conf to grub.cfg using grub-menulst2cfg. But since grub1 files will be removed from /boot/grub, that may lead to non-bootable system, unless the user installs grub2 to the MBR using grub-install. > Let them move to grub-bios. > >> I'll be pushing grub2 rc1 to [testing] in a moment if you want to give >> it a try. Final 2.00 release should be in one of the next days. >> >> Cheers, >> Ronald >> > > > -- > Ionuț > > >

1 1

[arch-general] [aur-general]WIKI/pacman -Sy
by Arno Gaboury 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

Dear list, I am currently fine tunning and installing lots of services on my Arch box. In that way, I often refers to Arch WIKI. On the *pacman WIKI*, there is a useful Warning: **When installing packages, do *not* refresh the package list without upgrading <https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman#Upgrading_packages> the system (i.e. |pacman -Sy /package_name/|); this can lead to dependency issues. But on most WIKI, when installing a new package is needed, I always find this command: *$pacman -S packagenam* As by definition WIKI will often adress to newbies, my thought was to replace whenever I find the above command by this following one: *$pacman -Sy packagenam* In that way, newbies will very quickly take the good and sain habit of running the *-y *option when installing a new package on their box. Any idea if it could be worthwile for the comuunity? TY.

3 4

[arch-general] grub/grub2 final - some questions
by mike cloaked 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

Subject: Re: [arch-dev-public] grub/grub2 final On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Ronald van Haren <pressh(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I was about to post a similar message... > > Anyway, I was planning to drop support of grub1. There has been no > upstream for a long time and all newer features are patched in or > require additional patches. I don't see a need to have it in [extra] > as grub-legacy. No problem uploading it to AUR so people can continue > to use it if they want, although you need i686 to build it so that > could be the only reason to keep it in [extra] for a bit... > > I've seen no major breakages in grub2 since beta2 iirc. Upstream > development has been going towards stability in recent betas and I > would consider it stable at the moment: there were no real bug reports > in the bugtracker for the last few months. > > I'd like to move 2.00 to [core] via [testing] when it is released, > letting the grub-bios (atm grub2-bios) replace the old grub package. > Adding an install message and a news item is probably a good idea at > the time. > > I'll be pushing grub2 rc1 to [testing] in a moment if you want to give > it a try. Final 2.00 release should be in one of the next days. I am slightly confused by some of the options that will become available once grub2 becomes the supported package in [core]. For someone who currently has hardware without EFI firmware (or any choice of switching in the BIOS menus), and boots via BIOS-grub- and with MBR and conventional partitions with an x86_64 arch system - then will it still be possible to boot with the only change being to move from grub to grub2 (using grub2-bios)? I am certainly confused about how UEFI fits in with that scenario. Would it be the same for someone running as above with 32 bit packages only? For a system based on hardware without EFI so that there is no option in the "BIOS" to switch from BIOS to EFI is there some magic that needs to happen for the BIOS to boot and then load UEFI code and support GPT partitions? Maybe I am the only one who is confused about these linked changes to BIOS/UEFI grub/grub2 and the system partitioning MBR/GPT? Is there a good clear link to an explanation of how this all fits together and what the options will be? I guess that in the future hardware will increasingly be purchased which has UEFI enabled by default (and at some point BIOS will presumably vanish altogether) with huge hard drive capacities, but at the moment many systems purchased in the past decade and still in use are not UEFI based, so the choices available to users need to be clear as grub2 and new options and code are developed for the boot process. Thanks in advance. -- mike c

2 2