April 2014 - Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] couchdb still at 1.5.0-2 even though it has been updated to 1.5.1-1 two weeks ago.
by Karol Blazewicz 28 Apr '14

28 Apr '14

couchdb is still at 1.5.0-2 even though it has been updated to 1.5.1-1 two weeks ago. https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/log/trunk?h=packages/… https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/couchdb/ Is something stuck? Did I miss something?

2 1

[arch-general] Using Wayland/Weston in ArchLinux
by pplive 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

Dear all, I have installed ArchLinux on a virtual machine hosted by my VirtualBox. The desktop I picked is enlightenment I have also installed wayland/weston by pacman. I tried to play with weston according to the following page: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/wayland If I just run weston, I can create a window, and I can configure the height/width of the window. However, when I tried "weston-launch", there is an error message "weston-launch must be run from a virtual terminal" When I tried "weston-flower", the error information is as follows: "error: XDG_RUNTIME_DIR not set in the environment. failed to connect to Wayland display: NO such file or directory failed to create display: No such file or directory" Did I miss something? Can somebody provide me some hints? Thanks so much! Best regards, Alex

2 1

[arch-general] pacman and keys
by Heiko Becker 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

Hey, today I tried to update my system and got errors related to my pacman keys. As I have not been using my computer for a week I reinitialized the pacman key database and downloaded the arch linux keys with pacman-key --import archlinux. After that my libreoffice issues were solved, but now I get the following error: error: jre7-openjdk-headless: signature from "Guillaume ALAUX <guillaume(a)archlinux.org>" is invalid :: File /var/cache/pacman/pkg/jre7-openjdk-headless-7.u55_2.4.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz is corrupted (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)). Do you want to delete it? [Y/n] Y error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. Can someone help me out? Best regards, Heiko

4 7

[arch-general] Does openssl 1.0.1.g-1 close the heartbleed exploit?
by David C. Rankin 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

Guys, I was testing my boxes after updating to openssl 1.0.1.g-1 with heartbleed.c and I am still able to grab and decrypt ssl packets. The openssl security note says 1.0.1.g is not effected by the bug, but I can still get a 64k chuck of data back from my server using the heartbleed.c test. (if I'm reading the output correctly) Am I may be doing something wrong? It is worth asking to be sure. Archlinux server: phoinix - openssl 1.0.1.g-1 from client machine: $ ./heartbleed386 -s 192.168.7.16 -p 443 -f outph -t 1 [ heartbleed - CVE-2014-0160 - OpenSSL information leak exploit [ ============================================================= [ connecting to 192.168.7.16 443/tcp [ connected to 192.168.7.16 443/tcp [ <3 <3 <3 heart bleed <3 <3 <3 [ heartbeat returned type=24 length=16408 [ decrypting SSL packet [ heartbleed leaked length=65535 [ final record type=24, length=16384 [ wrote 16381 bytes of heap to file 'outph' [ heartbeat returned type=24 length=16408 [ decrypting SSL packet [ final record type=24, length=16384 [ wrote 16384 bytes of heap to file 'outph' [ heartbeat returned type=24 length=16408 [ decrypting SSL packet [ final record type=24, length=16384 [ wrote 16384 bytes of heap to file 'outph' [ heartbeat returned type=24 length=16408 [ decrypting SSL packet [ final record type=24, length=16384 [ wrote 16384 bytes of heap to file 'outph' [ heartbeat returned type=24 length=42 [ decrypting SSL packet [ final record type=24, length=18 [ wrote 18 bytes of heap to file 'outph' [ done. $ ls -al outph -rwx------ 1 david david 65554 Apr 25 01:43 outph $ hexdump -C outph 00000000 52 74 59 da c6 d0 3a 5d 35 7e 33 fc 43 de e5 bb |RtY...:]5~3.C...| 00000010 31 a2 ca c1 30 ff 5a e7 fd 28 52 4a 3c 18 51 4b |1...0.Z..(RJ<.QK| 00000020 93 1e 2e 7b 41 58 e2 79 58 b8 26 f4 a0 d2 11 22 |...{AX.yX.&...."| 00000030 4d bc 62 54 7c 59 5c 63 11 42 fe 88 00 87 c0 32 |M.bT|Y\c.B.....2| 00000040 c0 2e c0 2a c0 26 c0 0f c0 05 00 9d 00 3d 00 35 |...*.&.......=.5| 00000050 00 84 c0 12 c0 08 c0 1c c0 1b 00 16 00 13 c0 0d |................| 00000060 c0 03 00 0a c0 2f c0 2b c0 27 c0 23 c0 13 c0 09 |...../.+.'.#....| 00000070 c0 1f c0 1e 00 a2 00 9e 00 67 00 40 00 33 00 32 |.........g.@.3.2| 00000080 00 9a 00 99 00 45 00 44 c0 31 c0 2d c0 29 c0 25 |.....E.D.1.-.).%| 00000090 c0 0e c0 04 00 9c 00 3c 00 2f 00 96 00 41 00 07 |.......<./...A..| 000000a0 c0 11 c0 07 c0 0c c0 02 00 05 00 04 00 15 00 12 |................| 000000b0 00 09 00 14 00 11 00 08 00 06 00 03 00 ff 02 01 |................| 000000c0 00 01 32 00 0b 00 04 03 00 01 02 00 0a 00 34 00 |..2...........4.| 000000d0 32 00 0e 00 0d 00 19 00 0b 00 0c 00 18 00 09 00 |2...............| 000000e0 0a 00 16 00 17 00 08 00 06 00 07 00 14 00 15 00 |................| 000000f0 04 00 05 00 12 00 13 00 01 00 02 00 03 00 0f 00 |................| 00000100 10 00 11 00 23 00 00 00 0d 00 20 00 1e 06 01 06 |....#..... .....| 00000110 02 06 03 05 01 05 02 05 03 04 01 04 02 04 03 03 |................| 00000120 01 03 02 03 03 02 01 02 02 02 03 00 0f 00 01 01 |................| 00000130 00 15 00 c1 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................| 00000140 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................| * 000001f0 00 00 00 00 00 5c c0 5d c0 5e c0 5f c0 60 c0 61 |.....\.].^._.`.a| 00000200 c0 62 c0 63 c0 64 c0 65 c0 66 c0 67 c0 68 c0 69 |.b.c.d.e.f.g.h.i| 00000210 c0 6a c0 6b c0 6c c0 6d c0 6e c0 6f c0 70 c0 71 |.j.k.l.m.n.o.p.q| 00000220 c0 72 c0 73 c0 74 c0 75 c0 76 c0 77 c0 78 c0 79 |.r.s.t.u.v.w.x.y| 00000230 c0 7a c0 7b c0 7c c0 7d c0 7e c0 7f c0 80 c0 81 |.z.{.|.}.~......| <snip - a lot more, with CN and other cert into visible> Can anyone confirm the openssl 1.0.1.g-1 fix against their arch server? The information I get back in response to heartbleed has been decrypted -- that leads me to believe the current openssl 1.0.1.g-1 may be suspect as well. Or am I looking at this wrong? The ./heartbleed output that concerns me is: [ heartbleed leaked length=65535 However, each of the subsequent calls by ./heartbleed returned only ~16408, which if I understand correctly is the max that should be returned after the fix: [ heartbeat returned type=24 length=16408 [ decrypting SSL packet [ final record type=24, length=16384 [ wrote 16384 bytes of heap to file 'outph' Is this the expected fixed behavior, or does this still reflect a vulnerability present? What say the experts? Thanks. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

4 4

[arch-general] Android support in Linux Arch
by Anatol Pomozov 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

In my TU application I promised to look at situation with Android support in Arch. Android is an open-source project that has a number of sub-projects. The official website offers prebuild binaries for those sub-projects such as sdk, ndk, build-tools, IDE plugins,... We want to simplify Android installation and maintenance and looking into turning it into real packages. Installing tools by downloading and unpacking is sux and so 90s. The naive way to add packages is to use these binaries and just repack them into Arch packages. Or download-at-installation - something like what we do for proprietary software. AUR has many android packages that download binary files from Android website. But using prebuilt binary packages is something atypical for Arch. There are issues with it: - android download site provides only 32-bit binaries so multilib repositories are required - prebuild packages do not use standard installation paths - they compile against older version of third-party projects and bundled it into download files. The packages should depend on existing system libraries instead. The plan is to provide proper Arch packages that do not have the problems listed above. I initially tried to build a package that follows "build whole Android source-tree" official instructions [1]. And then pack only parts we need. Oh boy, this was painful. The source tree is several Gb of code, it pulls prebuilt versions of gcc, clang, python,.. It requires specific version of make and java. After a week of trying to build Android on Arch without using prebuilds I gave up. Actually those instructions [1] build system images that include kernel and ARM code for a specific hardware. Arch does not need it. I've decided to attack this problem from other side: find what exactly we need to pack as Arch packages and then build it from sources. I've decided to look to AUR non-binary android packages and see what people vote for (who said that voting is useless?). There are a number of packages that seems good for moving to [community]: - android-tools https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/android-tools/ It contains adb and fastboot. These the packages that I am interested in. I am not an Android developer I am just an Android user and adb is the most useful Android tool for me. - android completion for adb/fastboot https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/android-bash-completion/ these files can be merged into previous package. - android-udev https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/android-udev/ sounds useful as well These 3 packages is easy to move to [community] and my gut feeling says it should be enough for the most Android users. These is another category of users: those who *develop* for Android and need a lot of other tools, such as: sdk sdk-build-tools: aapt, aidl, dexdump, dx, llvm-rs-cc ndk api docs IDE plugins? system images? I did not find source packages for it at AUR. So if we want to add it [community] we need to create such packages but it might be quite hard. Are there people with Android development background? What exactly do you miss in Arch? Is it worth building our own SDK/eclipse plugins/...? [1] http://source.android.com/source/building-running.html

6 10

Re: [arch-general] PPPoE broken on upload
by Daniel Petre 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

On 25/04/14 15:25, Wayne S wrote: > At 4/22/2014 06:31 AM, Lone Wolf wrote: >> On 22-04-14 02:49, Wayne S wrote: >>> >>> Recent updates have caused problems with my PPPoE FIOS link. The upload speed has been reduced to near zero. >>> >>> I "was" using arch linux box as a firewall router. I have a verizon fios connection that still uses the old pppoe. Recently the pppoe connection upload bandwidth went down to < 50kbps (normally it is >25Mbps), however the download bandwidth is still around 58Mbps. >>> >>> There was a recent thread about recompiling PPP to 2.4.6, however, whatever this change did in recent updates, has broken my router PPP connection upload speed. > >> What was the previous version of ppp that did work ? > > The previous pppd that worked was probably 2.4.5, but I have not kept accurate records of when the problem started. Or it may have been 2.4.6 and just the recent update broke ppp. > > It is not hardware related as I tested on two systems with different ethernet nics. > > I was curious about the thread back in Feburary relating to PPP > https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2014-February/035128.h… > and if those changes from testing in february have now broken ppp in recent releases? > >>> During boot pppd 2.4.6 is started and the message RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.8d compiled against pppd 2.4.6. I see no errors. >> latest rp-ppoe version in repos is 3.11.5 , have you tried with that version ? > > I have the latest rp-pppoe 3.11.5 and it makes no difference other than it says "3.8p compiled against pppd 2.4.6" during boot. > >> Was the new arch based fw router a fresh install, or an existing system ? > > Firewall was existing system, which had been running fine since august 2013. Only a recent update broke pppoe. > > I have now switched the router to ubuntu server 14.04 and am back to 60Mbps download and 30Mbps upload speed. The previous upload was so slow just simple browsing would hang. > > Wayne > > > Hello, with 3.14.1 i get like 1 Mbit/s upload, with linux-lts (3.0.37) i have it as usual at ~ 90 Mbit/s ..

1 0

Re: [arch-general] PPPoE broken on upload
by LoneVVolf 25 Apr '14

25 Apr '14

On 22-04-14 02:49, Wayne S wrote: > No answers on previous post so starting new topic. > > Recent updates have caused problems with my PPPoE FIOS link. The upload speed has been reduced to near zero. > > I "was" using arch linux box as a firewall router. I have a verizon fios connection that still uses the old pppoe. Recently the pppoe connection upload bandwidth went down to < 50kbps (normally it is >25Mbps), however the download bandwidth is still around 58Mbps. > > There was a recent thread about recompiling PPP to 2.4.6, however, whatever this change did in recent updates, has broken my router PPP connection upload speed. What was the previous version of ppp that did work ? > During boot pppd 2.4.6 is started and the message RP-PPPoE plugin version 3.8d compiled against pppd 2.4.6. I see no errors. latest rp-ppoe version in repos is 3.11.5 , have you tried with that version ? please post a complete log of a boot. > I switched over to using the Verizon actiontec fios router and it works OK. I switched over to an archlinuxarm on a Utilite computer, and it works OK. what version of ppp /rp-ppoe does the archlinuxarm system use ? Have you compared the arm PKGBUILDs with the x86_64/i686 PKGBUILDs ? > I built a new arch based firewall router on a different computer, and it has the same problem with the latest Arch on my existing router. Which leads me to conclude that something went wrong with pppoe after the recompile to 2.4.6. > > Any help would be welcome on what is going on, or how to diagnose. > > Wayne > > > > Was the new arch based fw router a fresh install, or an existing system ? Note : I know a bit about the ppp/rp-pppoe protocols but next to nothing about it's practical use. My questions are intended to get information that will help troubleshooting this. Lone_Wolf

2 2

[arch-general] [Classroom] Intro. to PKGBUILD class - April 19th
by fsckd 23 Apr '14

23 Apr '14

Hello, There will be a class on PKGBUILDs by CalimeroTeknik. It will cover the basics of packaging and how to write a PKGBUILD. Everyone is welcome to attend. The only prerequisite is an interest in the topic. Here is a list of topics that may be covered. You can vote for those which interest you. The ones with the most votes will get more attention in the class. https://pad.riseup.net/p/pkgbuild-class-apr2014 Dates and times: Saturday, April 19, 2014 9:30AM UTC (~7:30PM in Brisbane AU and ~10:30 in Wellington NZ) 4PM UTC (~12 noon in New York and ~9am in Vancouver) CalimeroTeknik is a bash hacker and a student. He is a longtime Arch Linux user (since about May 2008) and released http://ctkarch.org/ in 2009.

7 8

Re: [arch-general] PPPoE broken on upload
by Ralf Mardorf 23 Apr '14

23 Apr '14

On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 22:14 -0400, Wayne S wrote: > I'm not sure how to downgrade to them to test. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/downgrade/ JFTR I'm using PPPoE too, but don't do uploads and tend to use oldish linux-rt kernels, so I can't say anything about the upload issue.

1 0

[arch-general] How do I preserve changes to okular.desktop?
by Chris Moline 23 Apr '14

23 Apr '14

Hi, every time I upgrade okular chrome starts opening two instances. One has a dialong saying it couldn't find '%I' and the other has the document I want. All I have to do to fix it is to remove %I from the .desktop file. How do I preserve this change across upgrades? Alternatively, how do I get the '%I' to be expanded properly? Sorry if this is asked a lot. My search-fu was not up to the task.

4 3