- Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] Issues compiling Jepp
by Sergi Pons Freixes 07 Nov '11

07 Nov '11

Hi All, I'm trying to install Jepp ( http://jepp.sourceforge.net/ ), but even after talking with the developer we cannot get it right. So, I'm gonna try asking here just in case somebody could give us some insight. I have a Linux 3.0-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2500 CPU @3.30GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux Using openjdk for java: openjdk6 6.b22_1.10.4-1 And Python 2.7: python2 2.7.2-2 Actually, my default Python is python 3.2.2-1, but as Jepp has not been ported to Python 3, before beginning the installation procedure I do an "export PYTHON=/usr/bin/python2", so it uses the path to the Python 2 binary (and libraries, as I can see on the logs). So, there is no problem when running autogen.sh (automake 1.11.1-2 here), and ./configure also runs ok. When doing the "make", it stalls with: ... Making all in jep make[3]: Entering directory `/home/sergi/installs/jep-2.4/src/jep' /bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../.. -I/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk/include -I/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk/include/linux -I/usr/include/python2.7 -g -O2 -MT jep_object.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/jep_object.Tpo -c -o jep_object.lo `test -f 'python/jep_object.c' || echo './'`python/jep_object.c mv -f .deps/jep_object.Tpo .deps/jep_object.Plo mv: cannot stat `.deps/jep_object.Tpo': No such file or directory make[3]: *** [jep_object.lo] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/sergi/installs/jep-2.4/src/jep' make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/sergi/installs/jep-2.4/src' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/sergi/installs/jep-2.4' make: *** [all] Error 2 Apart from that, I cannot glance any problem, missing dependency or warning before, so no clue of why it's not building correctly. I've also tried with other gcc versions, no luck. Mike Johnson, the developer of Jepp, pointed: "That's weird, the -MF flag is passed to the compiler and gcc should have written out that file." and "...any idea why that is. It must be a bug in autotools, you can try to upgrade them. Or you can manually make the .deps folder and an empty file for each one it complains on. The dependency files are just make rules used to regenerate just the changed objects if a source file changes. Unless you're changing stuff, it won't matter..." So... any suggestion? Regards, Sergi

2 2

[arch-general] fluxbox with dbus session freezes.
by Javier Vasquez 07 Nov '11

07 Nov '11

Hi, I don't use d-bus much, since I don't use desktop environments and I tend to use light and configured things like autofs, fluxbox itself and the like. On my x86-64 machine running under arch-linux, I tried starting dbus sessions prior to executing fluxbox as follows: dbuslaunch="`which dbus-launch 2>/dev/null`" if [ -n "$dbuslaunch" ] && [ -x "$dbuslaunch" ] && [ -z "$DBUS_SESSION_BUS_ADDRESS" ]; then eval `$dbuslaunch --sh-syntax --exit-with-session` fi exec startfluxbox When running startx, it starts OK... Problem is if I leave X to do something in the console, and the same tty where I started the X session, and come back to X, fluxbox is already frozen. I opted for not starting the dbus session, or as I work around make sure when leaving X temporally, make sure nothing is done on the same tty where X started... Has anyone experienced the same? Thanks, -- Javier.

2 1

[arch-general] Problem automatically importing key for signed package.
by Peter Lewis 06 Nov '11

06 Nov '11

Hi, I've been trying to get to grips with the package signing stuff, and have just added my first signed package (choqok) to [community], but am having a problem installing it from the repo, when pacman doesn't already know about my key. I'm probably missing a step somewhere, or maybe I've found a bug, not sure. I followed the instructions on the wiki, with the slight difference that I already had a key, so just used that one. Here's the problem. After successfully building in a chroot and submitting and signing the package, all using devtools, I get this: % sudo pacman -S choqok ... error: choqok: key "22AD5874F39D989F" is unknown error: failed to commit transaction (invalid or corrupted package (PGP signature)) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. I tried the obvious cache clearing and -Syy'ing, just to be sure, but that didn't fix it. For other people's packages, after the "key XXX unknown" message, I get the option to get it from the keyserver and add it to pacman's keyring. But I don't get that option for my own key. But: % gpg --homedir gpg-temp --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 22AD5874F39D989F gpg: requesting key F39D989F from hkp server pgp.mit.edu gpg: key E19DAA50: public key "Peter Richard Lewis <pete(a)muddygoat.org>" imported gpg: no ultimately trusted keys found gpg: Total number processed: 1 gpg: imported: 1 And just to be sure, in my build directory: % gpg --verify choqok-1.2-2-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz.sig gpg: Signature made Sat 05 Nov 2011 05:27:56 PM GMT using RSA key ID F39D989F gpg: Good signature from "Peter Richard Lewis <pete(a)muddygoat.org>" gpg: aka "Peter Richard Lewis <prlewis(a)letterboxes.org>" gpg: aka "Peter Richard Lewis <p.r.lewis(a)cs.bham.ac.uk>" gpg: aka "Peter Richard Lewis <plewis(a)aur.archlinux.org>" At first I thought that maybe pacman wouldn't support multiple UIDs, but then pacman-key -l shows up that several devs and TUs have this. Did I miss something that I should have done? Thanks, Pete.

4 4

[arch-general] About updating /etc/shells
by Nyuszika7H 04 Nov '11

04 Nov '11

Hi, It seems that updating /etc/shells causes new shells to go after the '# End of file' comment. This doesn't seem to cause any problems, but it looks weird when you open that file. For example, if I want to install zsh: /etc/shells (before): # # /etc/shells # /bin/sh /bin/bash /bin/ksh /bin/csh /bin/dash # End of file /etc/shells (after): # # /etc/shells # /bin/sh /bin/bash /bin/ksh /bin/csh /bin/dash # End of file /bin/zsh This is only a minor issue, but it would be nice to have a workaround for it. nyuszika7h

1 0

[arch-general] /usr/bin/ksh support should be dropped
by Nyuszika7H 04 Nov '11

04 Nov '11

Hi, I get the following warning when starting up ksh: WARNING: you should be calling ksh with /bin/ksh, not with /usr/bin/ksh. Please execute chsh to fix this. Legacy /usr/bin/ksh support will go away! $ Considering csh and tcsh were also moved to /bin/, it would be a good idea to remove the /usr/bin/ksh binary (it exists in /bin/, too). Note: I'm using zsh as my primary shell, but I installed other shells so users can use them if they wish. nyuszika7h

1 0

[arch-general] [signoff] gettext-0.18.1.1-4
by Tobias Powalowski 04 Nov '11

04 Nov '11

Hi, signed rebuild, please signoff both arches, greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

1 0

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Package signoffs page
by Lukas Fleischer 04 Nov '11

04 Nov '11

On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 10:16:19AM -0500, Dan McGee wrote: > Devs, > > This seems like a good time to get the ball fully rolling on the > package signoffs page: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ > > I and a few others would like to make this the goto for signoffs- > fewer emails, easier to see at a glance what signoffs are pending, > etc. Given we have a large set of packages in [testing] right now for > some [core] signature rebuilds, this seems like an ideal time to get > some feedback so we can fully migrate to using this page. > > So this is a call for (constructive) feedback on what more I need to > implement to make it useful to all of you. A list below is things > already on the todo list that definitely need to be done; if there are > other things that *need* to be done, please let me know. If there are > other things that would be nice, let me know too, but that might be > worth a feature request that can be worked on after we switch. > > Must haves: > * A way to cancel a signoff > * Signoff "blacklist" or modification- basically say "this package > doesn't need signoffs, just remove it from display" > * A daily summary email saying "hey gang, here are today's pending signoffs" +1. And +1 to a "red flag"/block feature to ensure packages that nuked someone's system won't be moved until this is resolved. By the way, are TUs encouraged to give their sign-offs as well or is this a dev-only thing? Oh, how will we handle user sign-offs in the future (I remember that these were asked for a few times)? Replies to the daily summary mails?

1 0

[arch-general] [signoff] linux-atm-2.5.2-1
by Tobias Powalowski 03 Nov '11

03 Nov '11

Hi, bump to latest version, please signoff both arches, greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 1

[arch-general] [signoff] xinetd-2.3.14-8
by Tobias Powalowski 03 Nov '11

03 Nov '11

Hi, signed rebuild, please signoff both arches, greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 1

[arch-general] [signoff] xfsprogs-3.1.6-1
by Tobias Powalowski 03 Nov '11

03 Nov '11

Hi, bump to latest version, please signoff both arches, greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

1 0