- Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] LVM/MDADM and GRUB2
by Tobias Powalowski 10 Mar '10

10 Mar '10

Hi, has anyone succeeded in having /boot on a lvm volume, or a mdadm raid device, which grub2 can directly boot from it? If yes please give me some advice how to do it, i want to add full grub2 support to archboot setup and the docs are quite messy. I haven't found a way to do such a setup. Many thanks for any input. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 1

[arch-general] A good twitter client
by Nilesh Govindarajan 10 Mar '10

10 Mar '10

Hi, Does anyone know a good twitter client for KDE apart from Firefox's echofon, Chromed Bird (I don't use GChrome), and KDE μblog ? Twitgin sucks if you have to many tweets from people you're following and that's my case. -- Nilesh Govindarajan Site & Server Administrator www.itech7.com

9 12

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] openssh 5.3p1-4: sshd script kills all sshd processes??
by Florian Pritz 10 Mar '10

10 Mar '10

On 10.03.2010 00:03, Thomas Bächler wrote: > What did whoever commited this smoke? It must have been very good: > http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/?op=comp&compare[]=%2Fopenssh%2Ftr… > > Whenever you want to do /etc/rc.d/sshd restart remotely, it will kill > your ssh session. It is an important feature of openssh that all ssh > connections stay OPEN even if you kill the master server. With this > change, you will get kicked and goodbye remote server. > http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18611 Aaron did the commit btw. -- Florian Pritz -- {flo,bluewind}(a)server-speed.net

1 0

[arch-general] [PATCH (dbscripts)] Fix permissions of incoming packages.
by Chris Brannon 10 Mar '10

10 Mar '10

This patch changes the permissions of uploaded packages to 664, before they are moved from the staging directory. The commitpkg script included in devtools uses rsync to upload packages, and rsync preserves permissions. This causes problems whenever permissions are too restrictive on the uploader's machine. Signed-off-by: Chris Brannon <cmbrannon79(a)gmail.com> --- db-update | 5 +++++ 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/db-update b/db-update index 0973bf3..3f36332 100755 --- a/db-update +++ b/db-update @@ -87,6 +87,11 @@ for current_arch in ${ARCHES[@]} any; do done done +# Give permissions of 664 to all files under $stagedir. +# I.E., readable-writable by user and group; readable by others. +# This insures that packages enter the ftp area with correct permissions. +find "$stagedir" -print0 -type f |xargs -0 chmod 664 + # Process architecture-independent packages first. if [ -d "$stagedir" ]; then ANYPKGS="$(getpkgfiles $stagedir/*-any$PKGEXT 2>/dev/null)" -- 1.7.0.1

5 10

[arch-general] svn packaging, abs => git ?
by Dieter Plaetinck 10 Mar '10

10 Mar '10

Couldn't find any discussion about this, but what about we maintain our packages in git instead of svn? pros: 1) git is awesome 2) we don't need abs/rsync anymore. users can just read from git. 3) git network communication is more efficient then rsync (afaik) 4) users can check out older versions of packages easily, with limited storage overhead. 5) makes it easier to maintain forks of packages (have your own git repository with some changes, then merge in upstream changes to keep them up to date. upstream == arch linux here) cons: 1) using git for abs will use more disk space because you need the checkout + the repo (a 60% or increase or so? my abs tree is now 57MB, so even if this becomes 100MB that's still ok imho) 2) svn->git migration is not trivial, since tools, the website, .. will need to be adapted. Dieter

14 24

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] wrong permission to packages
by Chris Brannon 10 Mar '10

10 Mar '10

Dan McGee wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Ionut Biru wrote: *SNIP* >> ok. so he has umask 077 and because we are using rsync the permission is >> persistent. maybe we should fix dbscripts and install the package with the >> right permission. > > Patches welcome. :) > > -Dan Hi, I'm the offender in this case. The file had permissions of 0600. When I used communitypkg to upload it, rsync preserved those permissions. My next message will have a patch for dbscripts. Hopefully, my proposed fix isn't too naive. -- Chris

1 0

[arch-general] New xorg-server package braks fluxbox?
by Javier Vasquez 09 Mar '10

09 Mar '10

Hi, Today's pacman -Syu installed new xorg-server package: % pacman -Qs xorg-server local/xorg-server 1.7.5.901-1 (xorg) X.Org X servers I have xorg.conf configured without hal support: Section "ServerFlags" Option "AutoAddDevices" "False" Option "AllowEmptyInput" "False" EndSection I also have fluxbox installed: % pacman -Qs fluxbox local/fluxbox 1.1.1-1 A lightweight and highly-configurable window manager And with the new xorg-server the behavior I'm seing is that if I try to maximize/minimize a window, fluxbox freezes, but if I do top, I don't see any process eating resources, neither memory, neither cpu... Another weird behavior, is that fluxbox keys are dead. I configured for example: # alt-left / alt-right Mod1 Right :NextWorkspace Mod1 Left :PrevWorkspace And they don't work. Well, if I try them like between the 1st 2 seconds, they actually work, after 2 seconds, they don't do a thing... I don't think this is a video card issue, since I have the same issue with a nvidia video card, and an ati video card: Driver "nvidia" VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation" BoardName "Quadro FX 570M" ... Driver "radeon" VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc" BoardName "Radeon RV250 [Mobility FireGL 9000]" Is this a bug? I don't want to use hal, but perhaps it's inevitable now as opposed as before, when we could still not depend upon it... So I'm not sure if the only way to make Xorg work now is through hal, or if this is just a temporal bug to be fixed... Please let me know. Thanks, -- Javier.

5 7

[arch-general] encfs boost and openssl
by Manne Merak 09 Mar '10

09 Mar '10

I have problems with the latest update and EncFS. Did check out the bug reports at Arch and EncFS and after downgrading Boost to 1.41 I now do not get the config file reading error anymore. Unfortunately trying to decode my data results in "Error decoding volume key, password incorrect", my password is definitely correct. I downgraded OpenSSL to 0.9.8k-3, still no luck. Does anyone have the correct combination of EncFS, Boost, OpenSSL and whatnotelse to get my data back? Manne

4 7

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Moving to pkg.tar.xz officially?
by Ng Oon-Ee 09 Mar '10

09 Mar '10

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre(a)archlinux.de> wrote: > Hi all, > > some of us already commit xz compressed packages, others don't. We didn't > really decide on this yet. > > So, is there a reason not to recommond every TU and Dev to change PKGEXT to > .pkg.tar.xz? > > We might also want to write a little announcement to inform users about this > change. While most of them wont be affected, some would have to adjust their > custom scripts. And for those who use netinstall on a 2009.02 or older iso > would have to run pacman -Syu once to get a version of libarchive which is > able to deal with xz. > > If wanted I also could add a check to devtools which issues a warning if xz is > not used. > > Greetings, > > Pierre > > -- > > Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre > What about devs/tus who also maintain AUR packages? As I recall AUR doesn't accept .tar.xz yet?

6 7

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] i686 pkg built in chroot on x86_64 doesn't work
by Ray Kohler 09 Mar '10

09 Mar '10

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Paul Mattal <paul(a)mattal.com> wrote: > > So this is a weird one, but I think I just made some headway. > > Apparently, this seems to be related to the ACTUAL CPU of the box I build > on. When building on an i686 Arch box running on an AMD 64 CPU, the build > generates the broken binaries! When I build on an Intel CPU, it works fine. > > So it would appear this is at least in part Tomcat's build process's fault > for not building the right thing based on the uname -m but rather looking > directly at the processor. > > Yuck. Perhaps I will at least add a note to the PKGBUILD suggesting this > issue, so that the next poor person who decides to update tomcat doesn't > trip over this same thing. > > Thanks, all, for working this through with me. Why not just stop building tomcat from source? What advantage does it give over just using the upstream binary distro?

1 0