[arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?

[Leonid Isaev]

On (10/24/11 09:37), Myra Nelson wrote:
-~> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 06:53, Tom Gundersen <teg at jklm.no> wrote:
-~> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Martti Kühne <mysatyre at gmail.com> wrote:
-~> >> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg at jklm.no> wrote:
-~> >> <snip>
-~> >>> Maybe this requirement should be communicated more clearly (e.g. a
-~> >>> comment in the standard pacman.conf)?
-~> >>
-~> <snip>
-~> doesn't get it and start slicing and dicing. Keep the commentary
-~> civil.
-~> 
-~> Myra
-~> 
-~> 
-~> -- 
-~> Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!

It is simple: if you don't use testing you never learn. Telling others "RTFM
and don't ask questions" is ridiculous, because following this logic >50% of
forum posts is just noise. And just because you subscribe to ML doesn't mean
that you'll remember 1 relevant message out of 100 (personally I learned more
from http://allanmcrae.com/2011/08/pacman-package-signing-3-pacman/ about
pacman package signing than from all of [{arch,pacman}-dev*]. This is of course
not to say that ML are not important, beacuse they are.

Besides, one really doesn't have to enable testing in pacman.conf -- individual
pacman -U will do, imho.

Regarding your compile flags, I would use -match=native (instead of your
-march and -m) and -fstack-protector-all (instead of -fstack-protector) if you
don't mind increasing the size of binaries a little.

-- 
Leonid Isaev
GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D
Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE  775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20111024/6bfca936/attachment-0001.asc>