March 2009 - Arch-dev-public - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-dev-public] amarok2 and mysql
by Tobias Powalowski 23 Mar '09

23 Mar '09

Hi i tried to build amarok2 this weekend and it's a real hassle to get it compiled, qt needs to be rebuilt with an other patch, 2 depends need to be added and mysql needs to be built with -fPIC option to get it build correct. I prepared everything and amarok2 runs fine now. Are there any mysql experts who can tell me if this hurts existing databases? Thanks for your answers. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

4 4

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] bzip2-1.0.5-4
by Allan McRae 23 Mar '09

23 Mar '09

Use our optimization (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/13415) Massive rewrite of PKGBUILD (install instead of mkdir/cp). Allan

3 2

Re: [arch-dev-public] amarok2 and mysql
by Jan de Groot 23 Mar '09

23 Mar '09

On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 17:01 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > Tobias Powalowski wrote: > > Hi > > i tried to build amarok2 this weekend and it's a real hassle to get it > > compiled, qt needs to be rebuilt with an other patch, 2 depends need to be > > added and mysql needs to be built with -fPIC option to get it build correct. > > I prepared everything and amarok2 runs fine now. > > > > Are there any mysql experts who can tell me if this hurts existing databases? > > Thanks for your answers. > > > > Wasn't there concerns about a performance hit in mysql when compiled > with -fPIC? Does the whole MySQL require recompiling with -fPIC, or is libmysqlclient enough?

1 0

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] xinetd-2.3.14-4
by Allan McRae 23 Mar '09

23 Mar '09

License rebuild only. Allan

2 2

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] isdn4k-utils-3.2p1-4
by Allan McRae 22 Mar '09

22 Mar '09

Licence rebuild only Allan

2 1

[arch-dev-public] Extra signoffs (wiki page)
by Hugo Doria 22 Mar '09

22 Mar '09

Hi guys, I created a wiki page about [extra] packages going to [testing]. This will avoid some more confusions (see the thread about deluge signoff): http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:ExtraSignoffs What you guys think? Anything to change/add? -- Hugo

2 1

[arch-dev-public] Bug Day - Saturday 21st March
by Allan McRae 21 Mar '09

21 Mar '09

On Saturday the 21st of March we will be holding a bug day to combat the ever increasing number of reports in our bug tracker. We will clear outdated reports, fix/implement those that already have patches provided or are trivial to fix/implement and discuss the pros and cons of implementing some feature requests. A rough TODO list that you can add to is on the wiki (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Bug_Day_TODO) Please join us in #archlinux-bugs on irc.freenode.net during the 21st of March. We live in many different timezones, so hopefully a dev will be present at all times during the day. Allan

4 5

[arch-dev-public] Integrity Check x86_64 20-03-2009
by repomaint＠archlinux.org 20 Mar '09

20 Mar '09

======================================== = Integrity Check x86_64 of core,extra = ======================================== Performing integrity checks... ==> parsing pkgbuilds ==> checking mismatches ==> checking archs ==> checking dependencies ==> checking makedepends ==> checking for circular dependencies Missing Dependencies ---------------------- archboot --> 'netkit-telnet>=0.17-8' archboot --> 'wlan-ng26>=0.2.9-2' archboot --> 'atl2>=2.0.5-2' Missing Makedepends --------------------- wpa_supplicant --> 'kernel26<2.6.28' gnome-speech --> 'espeak' Repo Hierarchy for Makedepends -------------------------------- core/sqlite3 depends on extra/tcl core/crda depends on extra/python-m2crypto core/iputils depends on extra/opensp core/iputils depends on extra/libxslt core/iputils depends on extra/docbook-xsl core/madwifi-utils depends on extra/sharutils core/e2fsprogs depends on extra/bc core/ca-certificates depends on extra/ruby core/madwifi depends on extra/sharutils Circular Dependencies ----------------------- gcc-gcj>eclipse-ecj>gcc-gcj Summary --------- Missing PKGBUILDs: 0 Invalid PKGBUILDs: 0 Mismatching PKGBUILD names: 0 Duplicate PKGBUILDs: 0 Invalid archs: 0 Missing (make)dependencies: 5 Repo hierarchy problems: 9 Circular dependencies: 1

1 0

[arch-dev-public] Integrity Check i686 20-03-2009
by repomaint＠archlinux.org 20 Mar '09

20 Mar '09

====================================== = Integrity Check i686 of core,extra = ====================================== Performing integrity checks... ==> parsing pkgbuilds ==> checking mismatches ==> checking archs ==> checking dependencies ==> checking makedepends ==> checking for circular dependencies Missing Dependencies ---------------------- archboot --> 'netkit-telnet>=0.17-8' archboot --> 'wlan-ng26>=0.2.9-2' archboot --> 'atl2>=2.0.5-2' Missing Makedepends --------------------- wpa_supplicant --> 'kernel26<2.6.28' gnome-speech --> 'espeak' Repo Hierarchy for Makedepends -------------------------------- core/sqlite3 depends on extra/tcl core/crda depends on extra/python-m2crypto core/iputils depends on extra/opensp core/iputils depends on extra/libxslt core/iputils depends on extra/docbook-xsl core/madwifi-utils depends on extra/sharutils core/e2fsprogs depends on extra/bc core/ca-certificates depends on extra/ruby core/madwifi depends on extra/sharutils Circular Dependencies ----------------------- gcc-gcj>eclipse-ecj>gcc-gcj Summary --------- Missing PKGBUILDs: 0 Invalid PKGBUILDs: 0 Mismatching PKGBUILD names: 0 Duplicate PKGBUILDs: 0 Invalid archs: 0 Missing (make)dependencies: 5 Repo hierarchy problems: 9 Circular dependencies: 1

1 0

[arch-dev-public] Adding static fuse devnode?
by Jan de Groot 20 Mar '09

20 Mar '09

Would it be possible to add a static fuse device node? At this moment we have this very ugly text in gvfs post_install: ==> GVFS requires FUSE to operate correctly ==> To make full use of GVFS, please load the "fuse" kernel module at bootup. ==> To do so, add 'fuse' to the MODULES array in /etc/rc.conf ==> ==> Without this module, GVFS will not be compatible with applications that ==> are not GIO-enabled. ==> Creating the /dev/fuse devicenode by default means the kernel will autoload it when needed. Is this wanted behaviour, and can we abuse udev's new static /dev support for this?

2 2