May 2006 - Arch-ports - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-ports] [Fwd: Re: [arch-dev] x64 some thoughts]
by Alexander Baldeck 25 May '06

25 May '06

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [arch-dev] x64 some thoughts Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 23:40:23 +0200 From: Alexander Baldeck <kth5(a)archlinuxppc.org> Reply-To: Development Discussion for Arch Linux <arch-dev(a)archlinux.org> To: Development Discussion for Arch Linux <arch-dev(a)archlinux.org> References: <200605232310.25106.t.powa(a)gmx.de> <1148419857.3660.14.camel(a)server.groot.local> Jan de Groot wrote: > On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 23:10 +0200, Tobias Powalowski wrote: > >> Hi >> hmm i don't know how this was all organized but i see some real problems in >> x64 organisation: >> - cvs get broken by ppl that don'T even inform us about their doing >> - they should be at least on the dev team that we can talk to them and they >> can inform us about their doing. >> - me is scared by those ppl that say on forum they want to be more bleeding >> edge then i686, when all packages should be the same status not that one >> port runs in front of the other. >> - there was no discussion about that at all on ML how to handle that stuff. >> - the new gcc,glibc stuff rebuild for 0.8 will be a big task so this must be >> organised well, else it becomes a fiasco. >> >> so please hear that call as it is now it causes a lot of trouble. >> any other opinions out there? >> > > One more thing: the amd64 port comes without multilib support. lib -> > lib64 symlinks are all over the place, etc. IMHO we should have some > quality standards for this: > > - kernel should support 32bit binaries (AFAIK it does) > - all libs should be installed in either /lib64 or /lib, not both. > - 32bit runtime libraries and crosscompilers should be available as > separate packages. Libs should go in /lib, or if this is chosen for > 64bit already, /lib32. > > Packages should be in sync with i686, not ahead of it. One thing that > doesn't look so good: why did we start this project with x86_64 in the > first place, the ppc port is much more grown up. If ppc would have > worked out, we could have included x86_64 later then. > > The thing is that archppc does not yet have an installer, this is the biggest flaw for making it official. I'm tired of calling for help and am quite proficient to do it manually with some live cd. Even then, I seriously lack the time to spend like 3 hours in a row not only waiting but actually doing something. :) So if that issue is being "fixed" somehow, I would agree to make it officially available. Not before! A 64/32bit hybrid sooner or later will of course be there for ppc as well. There's the G5 and POWER5 which are pure 64bit. They are backwards compatible just like the x86_64 though, meaning they can run 32bit code. With one dev? Hell no, impossible! Cheers, Alex _______________________________________________ arch-dev mailing list arch-dev(a)archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev

2 1

Re: [arch-ports] [arch-dev] x64 some thoughts
by Jason Chu 23 May '06

23 May '06

On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 11:30:57PM +0200, Jan de Groot wrote: > On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 23:10 +0200, Tobias Powalowski wrote: > > Hi > > hmm i don't know how this was all organized but i see some real problems in > > x64 organisation: > > - cvs get broken by ppl that don'T even inform us about their doing > > - they should be at least on the dev team that we can talk to them and they > > can inform us about their doing. > > - me is scared by those ppl that say on forum they want to be more bleeding > > edge then i686, when all packages should be the same status not that one > > port runs in front of the other. > > - there was no discussion about that at all on ML how to handle that stuff. > > - the new gcc,glibc stuff rebuild for 0.8 will be a big task so this must be > > organised well, else it becomes a fiasco. > > > > so please hear that call as it is now it causes a lot of trouble. > > any other opinions out there? > > One more thing: the amd64 port comes without multilib support. lib -> > lib64 symlinks are all over the place, etc. IMHO we should have some > quality standards for this: > > - kernel should support 32bit binaries (AFAIK it does) > - all libs should be installed in either /lib64 or /lib, not both. > - 32bit runtime libraries and crosscompilers should be available as > separate packages. Libs should go in /lib, or if this is chosen for > 64bit already, /lib32. > > Packages should be in sync with i686, not ahead of it. One thing that > doesn't look so good: why did we start this project with x86_64 in the > first place, the ppc port is much more grown up. If ppc would have > worked out, we could have included x86_64 later then. While I love being a go-between from the x86_64 community and the devs, we should probably take these discussions over to the arch-ports list so that everyone can comment on them. I'm CC'ing that list with this email. Jason -- If you understand, things are just as they are. If you do not understand, things are just as they are.

1 0

[arch-ports] Arch Port for Sparc Prozessors
by Bob Kromonos Achten 22 May '06

22 May '06

Is there anyone thinking about portation to sparc architecures?

1 0

[arch-ports] [amd64] cplay pkg is missing because i686 PKGBUILD has dead link
by Nikos Kouremenos 21 May '06

21 May '06

this applies to i686 it's why I CC the URL for tarball is: http://mask.tf.hut.fi/~flu/hacks/cplay/cplay-1.49.tar.gz yes he addes this hacks/ dir which is missing in PKGBUILD of i686 and thus makepkg fails, and thus amd64 is missing this player. Hope somone with CVS access fixes it -- Nikos Kouremenos Undergraduate Student, Computer Science, University of Piraeus

1 0

[arch-ports] [amd64] abiword File -> Open/Save(as) crashed with "aborted"
by Nikos Kouremenos 21 May '06

21 May '06

Anyone can confirm it? Anyone knows why it happens? abiword foo.doc fortunately works. so it's a problem with the filechooser (because save as also crashes) on a sidenote: installing abiword doesn't register it as app that can open DOC? Why is that? IIRC this wasn't the case in 32 but I could be wrong. Hope we have gcc 4.1 soon so andy and rest guys can patch & compile OOo2 on 64 -- Nikos Kouremenos Undergraduate Student, Computer Science, University of Piraeus

1 0

[arch-ports] [Arch64] lua updates breaks some kde components
by Andreas Radke 20 May '06

20 May '06

our kdelibs have been built against my installed lua by a mistake. so the recent lua update breaks some kde applications (kwrite, kate and maybe more). i will rebuild all kde apps when i come to the kde directory while importing them into archlinux.org's cvs. if you need them before roll back lua package or recompile kdelibs and what depends on it. AndyRTR

1 0

[arch-ports] Last update at arch64.org
by Andreas Radke 19 May '06

19 May '06

Now download the last update. It is a downgrade for pacman to version 2.9.8-1. The force option is not working as it should. So just pacman -Sy pacman it! If you have version -1 in your cache rm /var/pacman/pkg/pacman-... it! Right now we have the new current repo working at archlinux.org. You can safely enable it in /etc/pacman.conf. Old repos from arch64.org you can use for fallback and extra repo. Soon extra should also work at archlinux.org. The abs script now fetches the whole cvs tagged with CURRENT-64 from archlinux.org to /var/abs. So pacman has done the moving. This was the last update at arch64.org. Bye arch64.org AndyRTR

2 2

[arch-ports] We are leaving arch64 moving to archlinux.org :)
by Andreas Radke 12 May '06

12 May '06

Great news: We have started the movement from arch64.org to archlinux.org. So there will be no more updates at arch64.org. But the repos will stay for a while. We are just copying everything to archlinux.org. We will inform you when archlinux.org will be ready for use. Give us some time. AndyRTR

1 0

[arch-ports] kdebase-3.5.2-3
by Varun Acharya 07 May '06

07 May '06

I've updated kdebase so that it now works with the latest dbus/hal. media:/ kio-slave is fully usable now. ganja_guru

2 2

[arch-ports] [arch64] obj-c support broken in gcc
by Andrew Ruder 07 May '06

07 May '06

Hey all, I think the gcc package just needs rebuilt; somehow or another the objc includes got stripped. I grabbed the PKGBUILD stuff from arch64 svn and: Mine contains: usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.0.3/include/objc/ usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.0.3/include/objc/hash.h [...] The one I downloaded doesn't have any of those files. Hopefully someone else can verify this. Thanks, Andy -- Andrew Ruder <aeruder(a)ksu.edu> http://www.aeruder.net

3 2