- Arch-ports - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-ports] [PATCH] Warn for non-unique source filenames
by dopsi＠dopsi.ch 06 Aug '18

06 Aug '18

From: Simon Doppler <dopsi(a)dopsi.ch> Detect if the source variable name either starts with `V`, `v` (or not) and followed by only digits and periods. --- Namcap/rules/pkginfo.py | 9 +++++++++ namcap-tags | 1 + 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/Namcap/rules/pkginfo.py b/Namcap/rules/pkginfo.py index 216e417..5f90828 100644 --- a/Namcap/rules/pkginfo.py +++ b/Namcap/rules/pkginfo.py @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ "These rules checks basic sanity of package metadata" import re +import os from Namcap.ruleclass import PkgInfoRule class CapsPkgnameRule(PkgInfoRule): @@ -43,4 +44,12 @@ class LicenseRule(PkgInfoRule): if "license" not in pkginfo or len(pkginfo["license"]) == 0: self.errors.append(("missing-license", ())) +class NonUniqueSourcesRule(PkgInfoRule): + name = "non-unique-source" + description = "Verifies the downloaded sources have a unique filename" + def analyze(self, pkginfo, tar): + for source_file in pkginfo["source"]: + if '::' not in source_file and re.match(r'^[vV]?(([0-9]){8}|([0-9]+\.?)+)\.', os.path.basename(source_file)): + self.warnings.append(("non-unique-source-name %s", os.path.basename(source_file))) + # vim: set ts=4 sw=4 noet: diff --git a/namcap-tags b/namcap-tags index 2133c45..5c236db 100644 --- a/namcap-tags +++ b/namcap-tags @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ missing-makedeps %s :: Split PKGBUILD needs additional makedepends %s to work pr no-elffiles-not-any-package :: No ELF files and not an "any" package non-fhs-info-page %s :: Non-FHS info page (%s) found. Use /usr/share/info instead non-fhs-man-page %s :: Non-FHS man page (%s) found. Use /usr/share/man instead +non-unique-source-name %s :: Non-unique source name (%s). Use a unique filename. not-a-common-license %s :: %s is not a common license (it's not in /usr/share/licenses/common/) not-enough-checksums %s %i needed :: Not enough %s: %i needed package-name-in-uppercase :: No upper case letters in package names -- 2.18.0

2 1

[arch-ports] How to report bug against whipper / accurateip-checksum
by Christian Keil 12 Jun '18

12 Jun '18

Hi, I wanted to submit a bug report for whipper / accurateip-checksum but trying to register for an account at bugs.archlinux32.org just results in a timeout: "Completely unexpected exception: Connection to 172.18.0.1:25 Timed Out This should never happend, please inform Flyspray Developers" The bug in short: accurateip-checksum has an error that causes a crash on 32bit architectures: https://github.com/leo-bogert/accuraterip-check sum/issues/2. whipper has its own version of accurateip-checksum with the necessary fix in its repo, but this isn't built for Arch's version. Best regards, Christian

3 4

[arch-ports] packages to be deleted
by Erich Eckner 06 Feb '18

06 Feb '18

Hi all, the process of deleting old(?) unbuildable packages from our repositories is not yet automated. And I'd like to run the first few iterations of it manually to not wipe our repositories ;-) Therefore I put a list of to-be-deleted packages on https://buildmaster.archlinux32.org/to-delete Note that the filenames may not match to 100%, because due to laziness I always put the "epoch" and "sub-pkgrel" in the version information. If you have any objections on removing those packages, now is the time to complain. For further information, there is a list of explicitely black listed packages here: https://buildmaster.archlinux32.org/blacklist.html regards, deep42thought

3 5

[arch-ports] [devtools] Rebasing devtools32 to contribute upstream
by Luke Shumaker 20 Jan '18

20 Jan '18

Hi all, As the maintainer of Parabola's devtools, I know that with a merging workflow, it can be a huge pain to rebase out changes to have patchset that you can contribute upstream. If any of the Arch Linux 32 team ever decide that you want to contribute changes from devtools32 into upstream devtools, I expect that you will find the "lukeshu/rebase/archlinux32" branch of https://git.parabola.nu/packages/devtools-par.git/ to be useful. It is simply devtools32's "master" branch, rebased so that it looks like it used a rebasing workflow instead of a merging workflow. I'll generally keep it up-to-date as I keep an eye out for anything that I might want to backport into Parabola. (And indeed, there's already one such change https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2018-January/004704.html ) -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker

2 2

[arch-ports] progress
by Erich Eckner 18 Sep '17

18 Sep '17

Dear i686 fans/users, we have now more than 3600 packages in our testing repositories, waiting to be tested and released into their stable repositories (core/extra/community). Although there are still ~30 broken packages, I think, this is a state suitable for a wider user base, so feel free to migrate [1] to our repositories and return feedback about problems (and possibly solutions?) here, on irc [2] and/or the forum [3]. Cheers, deep42thought [1] https://archlinux32.org/download -> Transition from the Official Repositories [2] #archlinux-ports @ irc.freenode.net [3] https://bbs.archlinux32.org

1 0

[arch-ports] Call for maintainers
by Erich Eckner 10 Aug '17

10 Aug '17

Hi i686-fans, we threw together some scripts, and now beleive to have a more or less working build-system running (suggestion: prove us wrong!). [1] As you can see on [1a], there are currently some broken packages (some with upstream bugs, some without). The current bottleneck are all those packages without a reason for being "blocked". As you might have guessed from the subject line, we are currently looking for maintainers - or more precisely: for people, willing to track down problems in single packages (the ones mentioned above). How you can help: 1) Have a look at the build logs (linked on [1a] in the "compilations" column - older logs reside in [1b]). 2) Figure out, what's wrong. If it's necessary to build by yourself, use devtools32 [2a,2b] on a 64 bit machine. If you know, what you do, you can also use the original devtools on a 32 bit machine or vm (but make sure, you use our package repositories for building) 3) let fix or fix yourself by (in order of preference): 3a) fixing package upstream (e.g. in x86_64-archlinux or the upstream source) 3b) creating a package modification in [3]: create a pull request or (if you have write access), push the modification yourself 3c) notifying us (preferably on irc [4] or per mail) about what seems to be the problem 3d) if there is no hope: blacklisting the package in [5] Although 3a) is the prefered way of fixing, _do_not_ open bugs on [6] for packages which are broken on i686 and not x86_64 - at least not after November 2017. Also, if you open a bugreport on [6], report the x86_64 bug - otherwise it might get closed, because i686 won't be supported upstream at some point. Thanks in advance for your support! Cheers, deep42thought [1] https://buildmaster.archlinux32.org [1a] https://buildmaster.archlinux32.org/broken-packages.html [1b] https://buildmaster.archlinux32.org/build-logs/ [2a] https://github.com/archlinux32/devtools32 [2b] devtools32 from https://arch.eckner.net/archlinuxewe/os/x86_64/ [3] https://github.com/archlinux32/packages/$repo/$package/ [4] #archlinux-ports on irc.freenode.net [5] https://github.com/archlinux32/packages/blacklist [6] https://bugs.archlinux.org

1 0

[arch-ports] August i686+dual ISOs available
by Tyler Dence 06 Aug '17

06 Aug '17

The August ISOs are now available for download. Master Mirror: http://mirror.archlinux32.org/archisos/ (EU/Germany) Tier 1 Mirrors: https://archlinux32.mirror.roelf.org/archisos/ (EU/France) http://32.arlm.tyzoid.com/archisos/ (North America/United States) http://arch32.mirrors.simplysam.us/archisos/ (North America/Canada) Also, if you haven't seen, we have an RSS feed of these announcements on our news page: https://news.archlinux32.org/ https://news.archlinux32.org/rss.php

3 5

[arch-ports] archlinux32 i586 support
by Alastair Hughes 03 Aug '17

03 Aug '17

I have an old i586 laptop that I'd be keen to try an Arch variant on - I'd be curious if a modern Arch actually runs well on a machine with such limited resources. It looks like the archlinux32 packages are i686 only at the moment - is there any interest in supporting i586 as well? Is the autobuilder infrastructure set up to bootstrap from x86_64, or are you just building off the older i686 releases? Regards, Alastair Hughes

2 1

[arch-ports] Arch Linux 32 Project Updates
by Tyler Dence 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

Hey all, If you haven't been following along in IRC for the last few weeks, we have had several advances in the Arch Linux 32 project: - The addition of a forum, https://bbs.archlinux32.org/ - A news page (with atom feed), https://news.archlinux32.org/ - We have started building the -i686 and -dual installation isos from the archlinux32 repo - Able to boot a system installed from the archlinux32 repo In addition, we have several ongoing projects, with varying stages of completeness: - Automated package build system - Automated testing infrastructure - Core infrastructure backup solution - Geographicaly spread out mirrors - we have EU covered pretty well, and one mirror in the US In addition, the July archlinux32 isos are now available from our mirrors: https://mirror.archlinux32.org/archisos/ (Master Mirror, EU/Germany) http://32.arlm.tyzoid.com/archisos/ (North America/United States) Let us know if anyone encounters issues, or hop on IRC/reply if you'd like to get involved with the ongoing projects. And as always, IRC logs are available on the mirrors as well: https://mirror.archlinux32.org/irc-logs/

2 1

Re: [arch-ports] Booting i686 iso in VirtualBox
by Tyzoid D 15 Jun '17

15 Jun '17

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Mr Seth Price <ssterling(a)firemail.cc> wrote: > > Is EFI enabled in the settings? I had a similar issue on my XPS 8700 till I enabled legacy BIOS. Beats me as to why, though. No, it was disabled. It will not even boot to the grub interface unless EFI is disabled. The screenshot was taken after selecting 'Boot Arch Linux (i686)' and the startup process failing. Additionally, the dual media seems to exhibit the same issue as the i686 only media.

3 7