- Pacman-dev - lists.archlinux.org

[pacman-dev] Rv: spanish translation for pacman
by Juan Pablo González T. 21 Apr '07

21 Apr '07

sorry :P --- "Juan Pablo González T." <lord_jotape(a)yahoo.com.ar> escribió: > Fecha: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 20:37:23 -0500 (CDT) > De: > "Juan Pablo González T." > <lord_jotape(a)yahoo.com.ar> > Asunto: spanish translation for pacman > Para: pacman-dev(a)archlinux.org > > hi.. the last month i wrote a question for a spanish > pacman translation. Finally we did it, with the > invaluable help of Gustavo Chain, member of this mail > list. > > well, less words, more action. the files attached are > translation of pacman and libalpm for the "es" > locale. > Please, add to the cvs. thanks > > > __________________________________________________ > Correo Yahoo! > Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam > ¡gratis! > Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ > __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/

1 0

[pacman-dev] spanish translation for pacman
by Juan Pablo González T. 21 Apr '07

21 Apr '07

hi.. the last month i wrote a question for a spanish pacman translation. Finally we did it, with the invaluable help of Gustavo Chain, member of this mail list. well, less words, more action. the files attached are translation of pacman and libalpm for the "es" locale. Please, add to the cvs. thanks __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! Regístrate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/

1 0

[pacman-dev] pacman, be quiet !
by Xavier 20 Apr '07

20 Apr '07

$sudo pacman -Syu ... :: lomoco: local (1.0-5) appears to be newer than repo (community/1.0-3) ... I know, I installed that! grrr... I know I'm annoying with debian (:D), but debian tools like apt-get or aptitude don't annoy me with these kind of messages at each upgrade. However, what I like in synaptic (gui frontend) is its ability to show these locally installed packages (I don't think apt-get can do it). So what would be great is to disable these messages by default, but being able to list them, with eg pacman -Q --local, or whatever. But that's too hard for me. Anyway, I was looking at pacman code in pacman.c , and saw this : 290 /* debug levels are made more 'human readable' than using a raw logmask 291 * here, we will ALWAYS set error and warning for now, though perhaps a 292 * --quiet option will remove these later */ So I went ahead and tried implementing this quiet flag. However, it's not very useful for me, because I'm too lazy to add an additional flag every time. At least now, I *can* disable these messages... but the behavior I described above would be much better.

5 10

[pacman-dev] Mirror list proposal
by Xavier 20 Apr '07

20 Apr '07

In this thread : http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=31339 phrakture said : "Yeah, dan and I have talked about this. If you're interested, please join the pacman-dev mailing list where we will be discussing this shortly." Did this really happen? I had an idea and proposed a patch, but as always, both the idea and patch are total crap, so I hoped someone would come with a better idea and better implementation of it :) As I already said there, I really like debian's scheme, so maybe something in the same spirit, but I'm not sure. It's maybe a bit more complicated to implement though, so maybe it would be better to agree on something before doing anything?

2 1

[pacman-dev] IgnorePkg priority over forced upgrade
by Xavier 19 Apr '07

19 Apr '07

Last pacman package had the force flag set, and it was highly annoying to try keeping a local version installed. It always wanted to upgrade it. I tried adding it to IgnorePkg, but it wasn't much better, it still asked me if I wanted to upgrade pacman at each pacman -Syu. So, I'm not sure if it's correct, but I made IgnorePkg really ignore the package. And for me at least, it's much better that way :)

1 0

[pacman-dev] CVS update of pacman-lib/scripts (makepkg)
by Aaron Griffin 18 Apr '07

18 Apr '07

Date: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 @ 01:50:00 Author: aaron Path: /home/cvs-pacman/pacman-lib/scripts Modified: makepkg (1.70 -> 1.71) * Alexander Baldeck <alexander(a)archlinux.org> Bugfix for FS#6944 ---------+ makepkg | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Index: pacman-lib/scripts/makepkg diff -u pacman-lib/scripts/makepkg:1.70 pacman-lib/scripts/makepkg:1.71 --- pacman-lib/scripts/makepkg:1.70 Mon Apr 16 23:56:52 2007 +++ pacman-lib/scripts/makepkg Wed Apr 18 01:50:00 2007 @@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ *application/x-cpio*) cmd="bsdtar -x -f $file" ;; *application/x-gzip*) - cmd="gunzip -f $file" ;; + cmd="gunzip -d -f $file" ;; *application/x-bzip*) cmd="bunzip2 -f $file" ;; esac

1 0

[pacman-dev] Translation problem
by Matthias Gorissen 18 Apr '07

18 Apr '07

Hi, I participated in the German translation of pacman3. So far, we haven't been able to make sense out of the following lines: #: lib/libalpm/conflict.c:201 #, c-format msgid "target '%s' is also in target list, using NEW conflicts" I assume there is a reason for using capital letters here - some fixed convention I simply don't know about. So what exactly does NEW refer to? Capital letters also appear as "DESC", "FILES" and "DEPENDS" - any explanation for a non-programmer would be welcome.

3 4

[pacman-dev] srcpac updates
by Dan McGee 18 Apr '07

18 Apr '07

Here are some updates for srcpac to bring it up to speed with pacman 3. As far as I know it should still be backward compatable with pacman 2, but I haven't done much testing in that department. I updated the version to 0.5, given that the version in the repos is marked 0.4.1 or something. A brief commit message if you want it: * Updates for pacman and makepkg 3. * Fix FS #6529- srcpac doesn't support pacman 3 languages. * Fix FS #6604- srcpac doesn't support makepkg 3 PKGDEST variable. * Other cleanups and style updates. -Dan

1 0

[pacman-dev] /etc/fstab rewritten by pacman!
by Dan McGee 18 Apr '07

18 Apr '07

Forwarding to pacman-dev. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: CHANTRY Xavier <xav(a)chantry.homelinux.org> Date: Apr 10, 2007 6:37 PM Subject: [pacman-dev] /etc/fstab rewritten by pacman! To: dpmcgee(a)gmail.com > I wonder if this is biting us: > http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2006-December/000838.html > Most certainly. > Roman, before you update, it would be interesting to get the three > different md5sums and see if this is the case. I'm just super > surprised that this never happened to me in all of my pacman updates. I was also very surprised, but you explained it clearly below :) > If this is it, then these should be the steps to reproduce (note that > these reports are starting at step 5, the other stuff happened in the > past): > 1. Install a package that had a NoUpgrade line. > 2. Edit a backup file. > 3. Upgrade the package, causing the local md5sum to be written to the > DB (instead of the original md5sum from the new package). > 4. Do NOT edit the file again, and remove the NoUpgrade line from pacman.conf. > 5. Upgrade the package, causing the 'original' and 'old' md5sum to be > identical, which allows pacman to write an upgraded file over your > custom config. That's indeed when either 3 or 4 are missing that we avoid the bug. Once the config files have been edited, the package need to be upgraded at least once for the wrong checksums to be stored. So if NoUpgrade lines are removed before the damage is done, the bug doesn't happen. > Possible fixes: > 1. Put NoUpgrade lines back in. This is hacky/ugly IMO. > 2. Back up all config files that are to be overwritten as .pacold > files, even if they are supposedly legal candidates for overwriting. > This will cause some clutter on systems, however, but will ensure no > configurations are lost (although they would be moved). Like I said the on the forums : http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=242384#p242384 the original plan was apparently to not remove NoUpgrade in the first place, and wait long enough so that it's safe to remove them. It could take a while though, before the last user updates the packages with NoUpgrade files using pacman 3, so that all checksums are corrected. Maybe the few packages containing NoUpgrade files should be forced to be reinstalled, after pacman 3 is installed. I'm not sure that's 100% bullet proof though. Maybe checking all checksums in the db would be safer. I've my part of responsibility in this problem, because I'm the one who started complaining about NoUpgrade, because it actually caused clutters, and it made it harder to keep all config files up to date. So 2. would cause even more clutters, which is quite contradictory, but well, if it's the only way.. I'm glad of pacman behavior once the transition is made, I already noticed the transition caused problems back then. But unfortunately, no one found a correct solution to it yet. > Thoughts? Am I right on this? I wasn't deep enough in pacman yet when > this issue came up. You look perfectly right to me (not that it means anything), but what disturbs be me highly is the behavior Roman describes. He claims he already did an upgrade of filesystem without NoUpgrade lines, so that should have put the correct checksums in the database. How could the bug be reproduced after that?

3 5

[pacman-dev] Upgrade Italian Translation
by Giovanni Scafora 17 Apr '07

17 Apr '07

Hi guys, there is an upgrade italian translation. Thanks. -- Giovanni Scafora Arch Linux Trusted User (voidnull) http://www.archlinux.org linuxmania(a)gmail.com

1 0