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

[arch-dev-public] [RFC] filesystem-2012.3-1
by Tom Gundersen 07 Jun '12

07 Jun '12

Hi guys, We want to tidy up the /var/{lock,run} situation. They should be symlinks to /run{,/lock}. Currently they are shipped as regular directories in the filesystem package, and on the next boot they are replaced by symlinks (by initscripts). It has been like this for about a year, and I'd like to fix this up properly by shipping the symlinks in the filesystem package. The upgrade requires user intervention: # rm /var/{lock,run} ; pacman -Syu Deleting these symlinks/folders on a running system might have unintended side effects, but as far as we have been able to figure out nothing fatal. To be on the safe side, I think we should (in a news item) advice users to shut down anything going on in the background to the extent possible before doing the upgrade and reboot after the upgrade is finished. Any thoughts on this? A request: it would be really ideal if we could roll a new installer release as soon as this is out, so people don't have to deal with these sorts of things on their first upgrade after install. Would that be possible? Cheers, Tom

3 8

Re: [arch-dev-public] [arch-general] [signoff] linux-3.3.8-1
by Tobias Powalowski 07 Jun '12

07 Jun '12

Am 06.06.2012 17:13, schrieb Sudaraka Wijesinghe: > On 06/06/12 18:31, Tobias Powalowski wrote: >> Hi guys, >> please signoff 3.3.8 series for both arches. >> package is not in testing, please grab it from here: >> http://dev.archlinux.org/~tpowa/linux/ >> >> This will move to [core] directly, because 3.4.1 is in [testing]. >> >> greetings >> tpowa >> > Just installed and rebooted x86_64, all seem to be good. > anyone for i686? -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

1 0

[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
by Arch Website Notification 07 Jun '12

07 Jun '12

=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 4 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 16 fully signed off packages * 17 packages missing signoffs * 10 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) == * filesystem-2012.6-2 (any) * initscripts-2012.06.1-1 (any) * psmisc-22.17-1 (i686) * psmisc-22.17-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (4 total) == * bison-2.5.1-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * bison-2.5.1-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (13 total) == * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (16 total) == * filesystem-2012.6-2 (any) * initscripts-2012.06.1-1 (any) * krb5-1.10.2-1 (i686) * linux-3.4.1-1 (i686) * pam-1.1.5-4 (i686) * psmisc-22.17-1 (i686) * systemd-185-1 (i686) * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) * krb5-1.10.2-1 (x86_64) * linux-3.4.1-1 (x86_64) * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (x86_64) * pam-1.1.5-4 (x86_64) * psmisc-22.17-1 (x86_64) * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64) * pambase-20120602-1 (any) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (10 total) == * gc-7.2-1 (i686), since 2012-05-18 * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-18 * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686), since 2012-05-21 * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64), since 2012-05-21 * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (i686), since 2012-05-22 * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (x86_64), since 2012-05-22 * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (i686), since 2012-05-24 * fcpci-31107-75 (i686), since 2012-05-24 * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (x86_64), since 2012-05-24 * fcpci-31107-75 (x86_64), since 2012-05-24 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. eric - 13 signoffs 2. tpowa - 9 signoffs 3. bisson - 8 signoffs 4. lcarlier - 5 signoffs 5. allan - 5 signoffs

1 0

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] [NACK] linux 3.4-1
by Florian Pritz 06 Jun '12

06 Jun '12

Hi, Starting with linux 3.4-1 I'm getting random corruptions when reading files from my file server over nfs and we've also seen problems with packages downloaded from our mirror on brynhild. The files on disk validate just fine (md5sum), it's just the transfer that seems to break. linux-lts 3.032-1 and linux 3.3.7-1 are good. -- Florian Pritz

3 4

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] linux-3.3.8-1
by Tobias Powalowski 06 Jun '12

06 Jun '12

Hi guys, please signoff 3.3.8 series for both arches. package is not in testing, please grab it from here: http://dev.archlinux.org/~tpowa/linux/ This will move to [core] directly, because 3.4.1 is in [testing]. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 1

[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
by Arch Website Notification 06 Jun '12

06 Jun '12

=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 8 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 7 fully signed off packages * 29 packages missing signoffs * 6 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (8 total) == * bison-2.5.1-1 (i686) * linux-3.4.1-1 (i686) * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (i686) * bison-2.5.1-1 (x86_64) * linux-3.4.1-1 (x86_64) * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (x86_64) * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (i686) * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (15 total) == * bison-2.5.1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * krb5-1.10.2-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * linux-3.4.1-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * pam-1.1.5-4 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * pinentry-0.8.1-4 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * bison-2.5.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * krb5-1.10.2-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * linux-3.4.1-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * linux-lts-3.0.33-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * pam-1.1.5-4 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (13 total) == * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dbus-python-1.1.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (1 total) == * libusbx-1.0.11-2 (i686) 1/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (7 total) == * filesystem-2012.6-1 (any) * fakeroot-1.18.4-1 (i686) * fakeroot-1.18.4-1 (x86_64) * pinentry-0.8.1-4 (x86_64) * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64) * pambase-20120602-1 (any) * libusbx-1.0.11-2 (x86_64) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (6 total) == * gc-7.2-1 (i686), since 2012-05-18 * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-18 * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686), since 2012-05-21 * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64), since 2012-05-21 * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (i686), since 2012-05-22 * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (x86_64), since 2012-05-22 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. thomas - 4 signoffs 2. foutrelis - 2 signoffs

4 3

[arch-dev-public] Fwd: limits.conf and fork bombing
by Tobias Powalowski 06 Jun '12

06 Jun '12

-------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: limits.conf and fork bombing Datum: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 13:15:26 +0200 Von: M0Rf30 <morf3089(a)gmail.com> An: tpowa(a)archlinux.org Could you insert a string into /etc/security/limits.conf to prevent a fork bombing attack? An example: * hard nproc 300 Thanks Best Regards Gianluca Boiano

6 5

[arch-dev-public] Time to go
by Paul Mattal 05 Jun '12

05 Jun '12

All, I've been inactive as a developer for a long time now, and I think it's time for me to go. It's been an exciting ride with you all. I came on to help launch the AUR in 2005, and we changed the Arch world forever. I encourage the new folks to think boldly and put your efforts and persistence into making the world better, one incremental improvement at a time-- and remember to have fun along the way! Best, Paul P.S. Dan, or anyone with uber access, can you take care of closing my shell access and removing me from the dev mailing lists?

6 5

[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]
by Arch Website Notification 05 Jun '12

05 Jun '12

=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 14 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 8 fully signed off packages * 24 packages missing signoffs * 6 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (14 total) == * filesystem-2012.6-1 (any) * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) * krb5-1.10.2-1 (i686) * pam-1.1.5-4 (i686) * systemd-185-1 (i686) * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) * krb5-1.10.2-1 (x86_64) * pam-1.1.5-4 (x86_64) * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) * gnome-session-3.4.2-2 (i686) * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) * gnome-session-3.4.2-2 (x86_64) * pambase-20120602-1 (any) == Incomplete signoffs for [core] (9 total) == * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * krb5-1.10.2-1 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * pam-1.1.5-4 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * pinentry-0.8.1-4 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * dnsutils-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * krb5-1.10.2-1 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs * pam-1.1.5-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * systemd-185-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [extra] (13 total) == * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * gnome-session-3.4.2-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * bind-9.9.1.P1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpci-31107-75 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcpcmcia-31107-70 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * gnome-session-3.4.2-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * lirc-1:0.9.0-18 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (2 total) == * pambase-20120602-1 (any) 1/2 signoffs * libusbx-1.0.11-2 (i686) 1/2 signoffs == Completed signoffs (8 total) == * filesystem-2012.6-1 (any) * fakeroot-1.18.4-1 (i686) * linux-3.4-1 (i686) * fakeroot-1.18.4-1 (x86_64) * linux-3.4-1 (x86_64) * pinentry-0.8.1-4 (x86_64) * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64) * libusbx-1.0.11-2 (x86_64) == All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (6 total) == * gc-7.2-1 (i686), since 2012-05-18 * gc-7.2-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-18 * linux-3.4-1 (i686), since 2012-05-21 * nvidia-295.53-2 (i686), since 2012-05-21 * linux-3.4-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-21 * nvidia-295.53-2 (x86_64), since 2012-05-21 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. stephane - 4 signoffs 2. foutrelis - 3 signoffs 3. allan - 2 signoffs

1 0

[arch-dev-public] Proposed news item: Package verification
by Gaetan Bisson 05 Jun '12

05 Jun '12

Hi everyone, How about the following news item? ======== Title: Having pacman verify packages Over the past six months, pacman has had package verification features, although they were turned off while we were still figuring out the details of our public-key infrastructure. This work has resulted in the <a href="https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/any/archlinux-keyring/">archlinux-keyring package</a> which contains all the data you need to authenticate packages as made by official Arch packagers (developers and trusted users). Having pacman verify packages is now as easy as doing: pacman -Syu archlinux-keyring pacman-key --init pacman-key --populate archlinux The archlinux-keyring package contains five master keys that are used to authenticate official Arch packagers, so you do not need to know who joins or leave the team: you just have to verify those five master keys once and for all. This last command will prompt you to do so; please do this cautiously by checking the fingerprints displayed against <a href="https://www.archlinux.org/master-keys/">those published on our website</a>. Then, set the following in your pacman.conf: SigLevel = PackageRequired TrustedOnly And you should be good to go! For more details on the development of pacman and archlinux-keyring, see the blog posts of <a href="http://allanmcrae.com/2011/12/pacman-package-signing-4-arch-linux/">Allan</a> and <a href="https://pierre-schmitz.com/verify-all-the-packages/">Pierre</a>. ======== Cheers. -- Gaetan

4 11