- Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] New script to backup source code from abs
by Christopher Rogers 02 Jan '11

02 Jan '11

I been looking for a way to backup source for sometime. Like a dvd iso disc. I started to look for away to do this after seeing 2012. It got me thinking of how to rebuild a compete archlinux system. This would also help us with are world domination plans. Joking aside, here is the script below: http://arch-live.isawsome.net/devel/backup-src.sh My script uncompresses the source code archives and re-compress them has $pkgname-$pkgver-$pkgrel.src.tar.lzma. I put the newer files in $SRCDEST/$repo folder. This makes it easier to find. It example below backups up all sources of extra repo in /var/abs/extra folder. ./backup-src.sh extra example below backups just abs source folder in /var/abs/extra. Including the abs archive uncompressed in abs/src folder. ./backup-src.sh extra abs I have seen some good compressing improvement when everything is re-compressed as .tar.lzma. For example chromium: chromium original archive is 130mb chromium re-compressed with .tar.lzma is 101.1mb You can extra the newer archives and build with 'makepkg -e'. I hope this helps.

1 0

[arch-general] ArchStudio
by Bernardo Barros 01 Jan '11

01 Jan '11

Hello everyone! I set up a repository based on a modified version of ArchAudio, with some of my stuff and lots of PKGBUILDs from AUR's contributors. Hope this helps to update and maintain ArchAudio alive and updated. Just source for now, no binaries. It is a hg repo, so it can also be hosted inBitBucket and Google Code, and can be easily forked, hacked and pushed back. The contribution work can be much easier this way, I think. The initial idea is not _necessarily_ to replace ArchAudio repo binaries, but set up a pool for development of the most updated and new in terms of professional audio packages for ArchLinux. https://bitbucket.org/smoge/archstudio Happy New Year! Bernardo

5 5

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Breaking the unspoken rule: AUR helper in [community]
by Heiko Baums 30 Dec '10

30 Dec '10

Am Thu, 30 Dec 2010 11:38:34 +0800 schrieb Ray Rashif <schiv(a)archlinux.org>: > We didn't even conclude a previous discussion [1] (if we did then it's > all in the negative), and now there is one of those tools in the > repositories? Honestly, I don't think this is fair practice as it > undermines the initiatives of others before who did not get the green > for stuff like this, and it ignores the importance of general > consensus. Given that it is such a grey area, there should be an > official discussion and possibly a vote. Now there is no reason why > things like slurpy and other download/upload helpers shouldn't get in. > > [1] > http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-November/011887.html It seems to have been moved from [community] to AUR again. Heiko

1 0

[arch-general] [core/filesystem 2010.10-1 -> 2010.12-1] breaks makepkg and firefox
by Martín Cigorraga 30 Dec '10

30 Dec '10

Dear devs, guys: I've been struggling for the past three days trying to find what was breaking makepkg [0] script and preventing Firefox to launch. Thanks I do weekly backups of my system I found after trial & error -updating one package at a time- the responsable is the core/filesystem package. Is anyone else suffering this? I already tried to look for info in www.archlinux.org/packages but it's not listed there. Should I open a new ticket at the bugtracker? Thanks for any advice. 0. Here are some logs: makepkg output after installing new filesystem 2010.12-1: http://aur.pastebin.com/VzRUu6yN /etc/makepkg.conf (untouched): http://aur.pastebin.com/RnqjbYaX last pacman's log with filesystem 2010.12-1 package installed: http://aur.pastebin.com/rZtXgifP

4 6

[arch-general] Removing unused locales?
by Nicolás Reynolds 29 Dec '10

29 Dec '10

Hi, it occurred to me today to check how much disk space /usr/share/locale was using on my system. Turned out to be 449.43M, though I only use en and es locales, which are in the code in the first case and ~13M in the second. Would it make sense to remove the extra ones? I mean, I don't think anyone will switch back and forth that many languages (220 on my system), but it would be just stupid to make extra i18n packages for everything... so, should pacman remove the unneeded languages on package installation? -- Salud! Nicolás Reynolds, xmpp:fauno@kiwwwi.com.ar omb:http://identi.ca/fauno blog:http://selfdandi.com.ar/ gnu/linux user #455044 http://parabolagnulinux.org http://endefensadelsl.org

3 3

Re: [arch-general] extra/progsreiserfs duplicate of core/reiserfsprogs?
by Grigorios Bouzakis 27 Dec '10

27 Dec '10

Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: > Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: > >> >> See my comments on https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9029 >> Tpowa must know something we dont and must be using it. >> > > Most likely cause of the reasons mentioned here: > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143485 > Testdisk uses libreiserfs. > Maybe there should be a big fat warning for standalone usage though. > Gentoo also does this: progsreiserfs_warning() { ewarn "progsreiserfs has been proven dangerous in the past, generating bad" ewarn "partitions and destroying data on resize/cpfs operations." ewarn "Because of this, we do NOT provide their binaries, but only their" ewarn "libraries instead, as these are needed for other applications." } .... # Make sure users only use the official namesys binaries rm -r "${D}"/usr/{sbin,share/man} || die "cant punt the cruft" -- Greg

1 0

Re: [arch-general] extra/progsreiserfs duplicate of core/reiserfsprogs?
by Grigorios Bouzakis 27 Dec '10

27 Dec '10

Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: > Guillaume ALAUX wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like > extra/progsreiserfs >> (0.3.0.5-5) is an old duplicate of core/reiserfsprogs > (3.6.21-3). >> >> I search for reasons in mailing list archives for having > both but found >> none. >> >> Nb: Old extra/progsreiserfs PKGBUILD [1] pulls a tarball > from >> ftp.archlinux.org. Let's remember to remove the tarball if > we get rid of >> the package. >> >> [1] >> > http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/progsreiserfs/trunk/PKGBUILD > > See my comments on https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9029 > Tpowa must know something we dont and must be using it. > Most likely cause of the reasons mentioned here: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143485 Testdisk uses libreiserfs. Maybe there should be a big fat warning for standalone usage though. -- Greg

1 0

Re: [arch-general] extra/progsreiserfs duplicate of core/reiserfsprogs?
by Grigorios Bouzakis 26 Dec '10

26 Dec '10

Guillaume ALAUX wrote: > Hello, > > Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks like extra/progsreiserfs > (0.3.0.5-5) is an old duplicate of core/reiserfsprogs (3.6.21-3). > > I search for reasons in mailing list archives for having both but found > none. > > Nb: Old extra/progsreiserfs PKGBUILD [1] pulls a tarball from > ftp.archlinux.org. Let's remember to remove the tarball if we get rid of > the package. > > [1] > http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/progsreiserfs/trunk/PKGBUILD See my comments on https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9029 Tpowa must know something we dont and must be using it. -- Greg

1 0

[arch-general] 'any' architecture repository
by John W Palmieri 25 Dec '10

25 Dec '10

Hey Gang: I'm creating my own packages and respository. I have both i686 and x86_64 architectures, as well as pure python code which is 'any' architecture. In order to get the 'any' packages to load in either 'i686' or 'x86_64', I have had to create a separate [custom-any] entry in pacman.conf and corresponding directory tree in the repository. I could add the 'any' packages to each of the machine architectures, but I don't like the redundancy. So is the separate entry the way to go? Obviously, I'd like one entry: [custom] ftp://server/linux/archlinux/$repo/os/$arch instead of: [custom] ftp://server/linux/archlinux/$repo/os/$arch [custom-any] ftp://server/linux/archlinux/$repo/os/any Thanks. -John

5 4

[arch-general] Arduino 64 wiki article
by Neil Munro 22 Dec '10

22 Dec '10

I have made the noted changes to the wiki article. Are there any more errors the need correcting? Is there a guideline for arch wiki writing so i can check that the article matches the rest of the arch wiki? I understand it may be a niche subject, but if anyone can test the instructions that would be great. Thanks, Neil

1 0