[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] ISO 2008.03 release status update

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 08:10:22PM +0100, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
> Hey guys keep cool,
> following packages i would like to see in core:
> 
> pending signoffs and move to base:
> pmciautils, just a small udev.rules fix waiting for signoff.
> cryptsetup -->waiting on response
> 
> klibc
> klibc-extras
> klibc-module-init-tools
> --> seems to be solid and movable, would you move in Thomas?
> 
> vi
> --> seems to be signed off, could Eric or Tobias this move in or should i move 
> it?
> 
> klibc-udev?
> the one from testing works fine, we can use this 116-3
> instead of 118 which is not buildable here.
> --> move in klibc-udev-116-3, would you move in Thomas?
> 
> initscripts?
> bump to 2008.03 with the last changes from git
> aaron and roman will add the final changes and then release a new version.
> 
> mkinitcpio?
> do we need a new version to get init= syntax back?
> if yes we could fix this bug also:
> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9433
> --> Aaron said doesn't seem to be an issue
> problem because of missing /dev/mem?
> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9813
> Thomas is this a showstopper?
> 
> pending signoffs and move to support:
> rp-pppoe --> waiting for response 
> tiacx --> will go to core now
> tiacx-firmware --> will go to core now
> 
> wpasupplicant?
> Thomas movable?
> 
> fuse?
> Thomas is there an issue atm?
> movable?
> 
> kbd?
> Roman wanted to add some changes and additions to it, 
> this is not critical we could live with the old version too.
> Roman just tell me, if we should wait for your work or not.
> 
> madwifi/madwifi-utils?
> I don't have the hardware and cannot test it at all.
> I am so undecided, Andy has issues with both the one in core and the one from 
> testing.
> Varun reported this bug on his macbook:
> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9802
> Others have no issues and gave signoff on general ml.
> We could move in the so called stable version or leave it with the snapshot we 
> already have in core.(I hate buggy modules:( )
> 
> delayed package moves due to rebuilds and issues:
> gcc
> build-toolchain
> libtool
> perl
> 
> any other comments?
> 
> greetings
> tpowa

May i add xorg-server to the above packages too? I know its not part of
core, let alone base, but its a very important package in extra.
Current xorg-server in testing comes with HAL enabled. Reference:
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9563
Is that gonna be the default now? Users probably havent reported back on 
this, but many had problems with it. On the other hand others didnt.
Its already a month in testing, but no decision has been made up yet.
Should this be reviewed later?
What do devs think about this change?

Greg