From rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl  Mon Jul  3 06:06:14 2006
From: rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl (Robert Stefaniuk)
Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 10:06:14 +0000
Subject: [arch-ports] arch64 bootable iso - hotplug needed
Message-ID: <1151921174.18008.5.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>

Hi!

Arch64 bootable iso doesn't have hotplug, and I can't get my network
connection working. I connect by Sagem 800 ASDL modem ( kernel module
ueagle-atm ) and I am not able to upload firmware. And I can't download
this package without net :D
There can be other packages required for some people to get network
working and maybe you could consider including them

For example in my country, Poland, a lot of people use this modem,
because main telephony company provides connection based on it.

Best regards,

Robert ( Casper ) Stefaniuk




From moritz.esser at gmx.de  Mon Jul  3 05:28:12 2006
From: moritz.esser at gmx.de (Moritz Alexander Esser)
Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 11:28:12 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] arch64 bootable iso - hotplug needed
In-Reply-To: <1151921174.18008.5.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
References: <1151921174.18008.5.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
Message-ID: <44A8E32C.1090705@gmx.de>

You'll probably won't need it because FTP-install is not working atm.
But this shouldn't get out of focus!

Moritz

Robert Stefaniuk wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Arch64 bootable iso doesn't have hotplug, and I can't get my network
> connection working. I connect by Sagem 800 ASDL modem ( kernel module
> ueagle-atm ) and I am not able to upload firmware. And I can't download
> this package without net :D
> There can be other packages required for some people to get network
> working and maybe you could consider including them
> 
> For example in my country, Poland, a lot of people use this modem,
> because main telephony company provides connection based on it.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Robert ( Casper ) Stefaniuk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
> 
> 



From a.radke at arcor.de  Mon Jul  3 10:32:39 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:32:39 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] arch64 bootable iso - hotplug needed
In-Reply-To: <1151921174.18008.5.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
References: <1151921174.18008.5.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
Message-ID: <20060703163239.206409c6@workstation64.home>

Am Mon, 03 Jul 2006 10:06:14 +0000
schrieb Robert Stefaniuk <rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl>:

> Hi!
> 
> Arch64 bootable iso doesn't have hotplug, and I can't get my network
> connection working. I connect by Sagem 800 ASDL modem ( kernel module
> ueagle-atm ) and I am not able to upload firmware. And I can't
> download this package without net :D
> There can be other packages required for some people to get network
> working and maybe you could consider including them
> 
> For example in my country, Poland, a lot of people use this modem,
> because main telephony company provides connection based on it.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Robert ( Casper ) Stefaniuk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports


hotplug is obsolete since udev provies the same features. it's beeing
dropped from all repos for a while.

the was a news out from 11th Feb '06 and read here
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Udev

andyrtr



From rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl  Wed Jul  5 07:21:58 2006
From: rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl (Robert Stefaniuk)
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 11:21:58 +0000
Subject: [arch-ports] New packages and /lib, upgrade system failed
Message-ID: <1152098518.9147.17.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>

I installed arch64 from bootable iso and then upgraded whole system with
packages from archlinux.org.
During update kernel it started complaining:
"cannod load shared object - no such file" about libraries:
libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
Then later on the system freezed. I rebooted, and I couldn't boot with
arch kernel ( pacman didn't make proper image yet ), my own kernel too
( after initrd removal: kernel panic - not sync - cannot find init - try
"init=" parametrer ) and of course my own kernel started be
I see that libraries are divided between /lib and /lib64 dirs and /lib64
contains missing two: libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
So maybe you have suggestions what to do now or before ;)
Best regards, thanks to the devs

							Robert




From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Wed Jul  5 10:22:28 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (ganja guru)
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 19:52:28 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] New packages and /lib, upgrade system failed
In-Reply-To: <1152098518.9147.17.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
References: <1152098518.9147.17.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
Message-ID: <b22123ed0607050722u552e23bo357b578756827c03@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/5/06, Robert Stefaniuk <rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl> wrote:
>
> I installed arch64 from bootable iso and then upgraded whole system with
> packages from archlinux.org.
> During update kernel it started complaining:
> "cannod load shared object - no such file" about libraries:
> libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
> Then later on the system freezed. I rebooted, and I couldn't boot with
> arch kernel ( pacman didn't make proper image yet ), my own kernel too
> ( after initrd removal: kernel panic - not sync - cannot find init - try
> "init=" parametrer ) and of course my own kernel started be
> I see that libraries are divided between /lib and /lib64 dirs and /lib64
> contains missing two: libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
> So maybe you have suggestions what to do now or before ;)
> Best regards, thanks to the devs
>
>                                                         Robert
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>

Same problem here. My system is unusable. I tried copying over /lib/*
and /usr/lib/* to /lib64/ and /usr/lib64/ and i got a kernel panic too.
I use a custom kernel and not an arch64 package.

ganja_guru
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060705/21ae2cb3/attachment.htm>

From a.radke at arcor.de  Wed Jul  5 11:23:38 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 17:23:38 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] New packages and /lib, upgrade system failed
In-Reply-To: <1152098518.9147.17.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
References: <1152098518.9147.17.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
Message-ID: <20060705172338.7175c0ef@workstation64.home>

Am Wed, 05 Jul 2006 11:21:58 +0000
schrieb Robert Stefaniuk <rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl>:

> I installed arch64 from bootable iso and then upgraded whole system
> with packages from archlinux.org.
> During update kernel it started complaining:
> "cannod load shared object - no such file" about libraries:
> libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
> Then later on the system freezed. I rebooted, and I couldn't boot with
> arch kernel ( pacman didn't make proper image yet ), my own kernel too
> ( after initrd removal: kernel panic - not sync - cannot find init -
> try "init=" parametrer ) and of course my own kernel started be
> I see that libraries are divided between /lib and /lib64 dirs
> and /lib64 contains missing two: libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
> So maybe you have suggestions what to do now or before ;)
> Best regards, thanks to the devs
> 
> 							Robert
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports


Hm. All tests were successfull. It seems the update can be broken if it
is not the only package that is updated in one run.

I had this now also on my test pc. I could solve it with coping all
libs from the new to the ol place /lib -> lib64 and /usr/lib
to /usr/lib64. Then I used pacman.static to roll back to the old glibc
2.3.6 and then again to glibc2.4. After that I had only to reinstall
the kernel package and all was fine again.

Sorry for the trouble. If someone can proove if it only appears when
the glibc package is not the only package to update I would write a
small warning to the mailing list to first only pacman -Sy glibc.

I hope we will soon have a new ISO where the paths are correct. BUt
first I have to make all updates from current and archlinux.org server
needs to be prepared for ftp installation.

AndyRTR



From arnaud.fortier at free.fr  Wed Jul  5 19:33:39 2006
From: arnaud.fortier at free.fr (Arnaud Fortier)
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 01:33:39 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] New packages and /lib, upgrade system failed
In-Reply-To: <20060705172338.7175c0ef@workstation64.home>
References: <1152098518.9147.17.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>
	<20060705172338.7175c0ef@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <44AC4C53.5040606@free.fr>

It's kind of working now, since the last update on ftp.archlinux.org, 
there is a current/os/x86_64/setup/ directory, it only misses 
pacman.pkg.tar.gz. I have a mirror here and I just upload 
ftp://xentac.net/amd64/current/setup/pacman.pkg.tar.gz into that dir and 
FTP install works like a charm.
Maybe a solution.

Greetings

Warnaud

Andreas Radke a ?crit :
> Am Wed, 05 Jul 2006 11:21:58 +0000
> schrieb Robert Stefaniuk <rstefaniuk at ippt.gov.pl>:
>
>   
>> I installed arch64 from bootable iso and then upgraded whole system
>> with packages from archlinux.org.
>> During update kernel it started complaining:
>> "cannod load shared object - no such file" about libraries:
>> libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
>> Then later on the system freezed. I rebooted, and I couldn't boot with
>> arch kernel ( pacman didn't make proper image yet ), my own kernel too
>> ( after initrd removal: kernel panic - not sync - cannot find init -
>> try "init=" parametrer ) and of course my own kernel started be
>> I see that libraries are divided between /lib and /lib64 dirs
>> and /lib64 contains missing two: libblkid.so.1 and libreadline.so.5
>> So maybe you have suggestions what to do now or before ;)
>> Best regards, thanks to the devs
>>
>> 							Robert
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> arch-ports mailing list
>> arch-ports at archlinux.org
>> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>>     
>
>
> Hm. All tests were successfull. It seems the update can be broken if it
> is not the only package that is updated in one run.
>
> I had this now also on my test pc. I could solve it with coping all
> libs from the new to the ol place /lib -> lib64 and /usr/lib
> to /usr/lib64. Then I used pacman.static to roll back to the old glibc
> 2.3.6 and then again to glibc2.4. After that I had only to reinstall
> the kernel package and all was fine again.
>
> Sorry for the trouble. If someone can proove if it only appears when
> the glibc package is not the only package to update I would write a
> small warning to the mailing list to first only pacman -Sy glibc.
>
> I hope we will soon have a new ISO where the paths are correct. BUt
> first I have to make all updates from current and archlinux.org server
> needs to be prepared for ftp installation.
>
> AndyRTR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>
>   




From arnaud.fortier at free.fr  Wed Jul  5 20:04:07 2006
From: arnaud.fortier at free.fr (Arnaud Fortier)
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 02:04:07 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] New packages and /lib, upgrade system failed
In-Reply-To: <44AC4C53.5040606@free.fr>
References: <1152098518.9147.17.camel@dp186.ippt.gov.pl>	<20060705172338.7175c0ef@workstation64.home>
	<44AC4C53.5040606@free.fr>
Message-ID: <44AC5377.6010904@free.fr>

I reply to myself :P
Xentac just updated the repo so FTP install should now works. Just 
choose ftp.archlinux.org then /current/os/x86_64 and you'll be able to 
have a fully up to date arch64 !
Good night ;)

Warnaud

Arnaud Fortier a ?crit :
> It's kind of working now, since the last update on ftp.archlinux.org, 
> there is a current/os/x86_64/setup/ directory, it only misses 
> pacman.pkg.tar.gz. I have a mirror here and I just upload 
> ftp://xentac.net/amd64/current/setup/pacman.pkg.tar.gz into that dir and 
> FTP install works like a charm.
> Maybe a solution.
>
> Greetings
>
> Warnaud
>
>   



From a.radke at arcor.de  Wed Jul  5 23:12:00 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 05:12:00 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] prefer ftp-install to avoid glibc upgrade
	issues
Message-ID: <20060706051200.0807eb2f@workstation64.home>

FTP install is now possible from all mirrors again and should be the
prefered way to install a fresh Arch64 from now on to not go in trouble
with the glibc update.

Also our current repo is fresh as the 32bit one again :)

http://home.arcor.de/a.radke/arch64/list/pkg_diff.html

Updating extra packages and a new ISO will be the next steps.

AndyRTR



From arnaud.fortier at free.fr  Fri Jul  7 08:12:13 2006
From: arnaud.fortier at free.fr (Arnaud Fortier)
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 14:12:13 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] Some problems
In-Reply-To: <20060706051200.0807eb2f@workstation64.home>
References: <20060706051200.0807eb2f@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <44AE4F9D.8070006@free.fr>

Now that the ftp install works, here is a brief review of problems I've 
noticed and their possible solutions :

_*First*_ : Xorg ... pacman -S xorg xorg-fonts-75dpi xorg-fonts-100dpi 
is better done than on arch32 there is less pkg missing anyway it still 
lacks :
xterm
xf86-input-mouse and xf86-input-keyboard ( I wish to have a working 
computer with no mouse / keyboard :| )

_Second_ : nvidia:
pacman -S nvidia
nvidia: not found in sync db
hum ...

wget ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/extra/os/x86_64/nvidia-1.0.8178-16.1.pkg.tar.gz' then 'pacman -A nvidia-1.0.8178-16.1.pkg.tar.gz

That will do the trick except that after you have to live with :

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libGL.so.1 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libnvidia-cfg.so.1 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libXvMCNVIDIA.so.1.0.8178 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libnvidia-tls.so.1 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libXvMCNVIDIA_dynamic.so.1 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libnvidia-cfg.so is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libnvidia-tls.so.1.0.8178 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libGL.so.1.0.8178 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libnvidia-cfg.so.1.0.8178 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libGL.so is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libGLcore.so.1 is empty, not checked.

/sbin/ldconfig: File /usr/lib/libGLcore.so.1.0.8178 is empty, not checked.


In EACH pacman command : /
It's also weird that the official pkg ( 
http://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86_64/1.0-8762/NVIDIA-Linux-x86_64-1.0-8762-pkg2.run) 
don't work at all, you can "modprobe nvidia" but then X xomplain that it 
can't loads the nvidia module ...

_*Third*_ : the WM/DM ( hopefully I use fluxbox ... )

 pacman -S kde

:: group kde:

    arts gwenview kde-common kdeaccessibility kdeaddons kdeadmin kdeartwork kdebase 

    kdebindings kdeedu kdegames kdegraphics kdelibs kdemultimedia kdenetwork kdepim kdesdk 

    kdetoys kdeutils 

    Install whole content? [Y/n] 

error: cannot resolve dependencies for "kdepim":

       "pilot-link" is not in the package set

pacman -S gnome

:: group gnome:

    gnome-icon-theme control-center epiphany gnome-applets gnome-backgrounds gnome-common 

    gnome-desktop gnome-media gnome-mime-data gnome-panel gnome-session gnome-themes 

    gnome2-user-docs metacity nautilus vte yelp 

    Install whole content? [Y/n] 

error: cannot resolve dependencies for "gconf":

       "orbit2" is not in the package set

pacman -S xfce4

:: group xfce4:

    gtk-xfce-engine libxfce4mcs libxfce4util libxfcegui4 xfcalendar xfce-mcs-manager 

    xfce-mcs-plugins xfce-utils xfce4-appfinder xfce4-icon-theme xfce4-iconbox xfce4-mixer 

    xfce4-panel xfce4-session xfce4-systray xfce4-toys xfce4-trigger-launcher xfdesktop xffm 

    xfprint xfwm4 xfwm4-themes 

    Install whole content? [Y/n] 

error: cannot resolve dependencies for "xfce4-toys":

       "fortune-mod" is not in the package set


_Fourth_ : other programms :

pacman -Ss openoffice

community/openoffice-pl 2.0.2-1

    OpenOffice polish language files


ntp misses a dependancies maybe because it should be installed : libelf

Point third and fourth (and nvidia driver install) are easely 
correctable => the extra db is just wrecked

I think those "major" issues should be corrected

Thanks

Warnaud




From a.radke at arcor.de  Fri Jul  7 10:26:17 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 16:26:17 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] Some problems
In-Reply-To: <44AE4F9D.8070006@free.fr>
References: <20060706051200.0807eb2f@workstation64.home>
	<44AE4F9D.8070006@free.fr>
Message-ID: <20060707162617.5c0c62c6@workstation64.home>

Nobody ever declared the extra repo from archlinux.org ready for use!

[root at workstation64 andyrtr]# pacman -Qf nvidia
nvidia 1.0.8762-1.1

works very well :)

Sit back and wait until extra repo is back up to date again. I'm doing
updates and a new ISO in a parallel way. It will take a while.

Everybody should still use arch64.org until you know what you do and
how to solve or live with broken libs.

AndyRTR



From arnaud.fortier at free.fr  Fri Jul  7 12:12:40 2006
From: arnaud.fortier at free.fr (Arnaud Fortier)
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 18:12:40 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] Some problems
In-Reply-To: <20060707162617.5c0c62c6@workstation64.home>
References: <20060706051200.0807eb2f@workstation64.home>	<44AE4F9D.8070006@free.fr>
	<20060707162617.5c0c62c6@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <44AE87F8.5010405@free.fr>

lol, so if I read well your previous message FTP install works now ?
but from what ftp ... no way to connect to ftp://arch64.org :( but on 
ftp.archlinux.org yes
So we need to have current on ftp.archlinux.org and extra on arch64.org ?

Also you said all is up to date ... ok yes but on ftp.archlinux.org for 
current

That's what I thought we have to use archlinux.org now

Warnaud

Andreas Radke a ?crit :
> Nobody ever declared the extra repo from archlinux.org ready for use!
>
> [root at workstation64 andyrtr]# pacman -Qf nvidia
> nvidia 1.0.8762-1.1
>
> works very well :)
>
> Sit back and wait until extra repo is back up to date again. I'm doing
> updates and a new ISO in a parallel way. It will take a while.
>
> Everybody should still use arch64.org until you know what you do and
> how to solve or live with broken libs.
>
> AndyRTR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>
>   




From a.radke at arcor.de  Mon Jul 10 14:59:16 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 20:59:16 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] new ISOs for testing out
Message-ID: <20060710205916.44e32cd9@workstation64.home>

I made a new set of ISOs for the Arch64 port. I used tpowa's
mkbootcd/archboot - these're great tools. CDs were made with all current
packages up to date until yesterday. 

This time we have a full current cd(still uploading), a base cd and a
ftp-only cd. So please test them and report bugs you will surely find.
Network detection worked for me, trying a ftp install worked also well
using ftp.archlinux.org.

We use the same installer as arch32. So look for bugs in the installer
and in our current packages as well.

The CDs include the new glibc, openssl, db and gnutils updates. So it's
not recommended to use the arch64.org repos anymore when you use the
new cds. I'll try to fix and update all extra packages as soon as
possible to get missing dependencies resolved. Until that you may
decide to wait or try old arch64.org extra repo for missing packages.

Good luck and praying for no showstopper bugs!

And here they are: http://www.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/

AndyRTR



From a.radke at arcor.de  Tue Jul 11 13:47:23 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 19:47:23 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
Message-ID: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>

Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
packages up to date in an acceptable time.

Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.

What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.

We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
Xentac. Read here more about it:

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild

i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64 with
pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.

Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there should
be only official packages from current/extra and later community on it.
A separate system would be nice but is not a must.

Don't be afraid. There's no need to have a ssh deamon running. The
system should be online most time. 24/7 up would be great.

I will also offer one or two systems. We will test the
configuration.

It would be great to have more systems later running the build daemon so
the nice load would get much lower.

So who will join the packaging party?

AndyRTR



From jason at archlinux.org  Tue Jul 11 14:16:37 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 11:16:37 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <20060711111637.4dcb291d@aries>

On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 19:47:23 +0200
Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:

> Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
> packages up to date in an acceptable time.
> 
> Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
> time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
> 
> What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
> 
> We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
> Xentac. Read here more about it:
> 
> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
> 
> i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
> pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
> running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64
> with pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
> 
> Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
> just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there
> should be only official packages from current/extra and later
> community on it. A separate system would be nice but is not a must.

Actually, a clean system is barely needed.  Because the build daemon
actually creates its own build chroot.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060711/7feca8d2/attachment.pgp>

From mmccaskill at nc.rr.com  Tue Jul 11 14:22:33 2006
From: mmccaskill at nc.rr.com (Michael McCaskill)
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:22:33 -0400
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <44B3EC69.5060008@nc.rr.com>

Andreas Radke wrote:
> Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
> packages up to date in an acceptable time.
>
> Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
> time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
>
> What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
>
> We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
> Xentac. Read here more about it:
>
> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
>
> i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
> pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
> running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64 with
> pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
>
> Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
> just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there should
> be only official packages from current/extra and later community on it.
> A separate system would be nice but is not a must.
>
> Don't be afraid. There's no need to have a ssh deamon running. The
> system should be online most time. 24/7 up would be great.
>
> I will also offer one or two systems. We will test the
> configuration.
>
> It would be great to have more systems later running the build daemon so
> the nice load would get much lower.
>
> So who will join the packaging party?
>
> AndyRTR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>   
Excellent. I will install pacbuild when I get home. I'm behind a home 
firewall. Do I need to open any ports?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060711/cbaf2b13/attachment.htm>

From jason at archlinux.org  Tue Jul 11 14:49:38 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 11:49:38 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <44B3EC69.5060008@nc.rr.com>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B3EC69.5060008@nc.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20060711114938.256ee304@aries>

On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:22:33 -0400
Michael McCaskill <mmccaskill at nc.rr.com> wrote:

> Excellent. I will install pacbuild when I get home. I'm behind a home 
> firewall. Do I need to open any ports?

Nope, your build machine does all the talking to the server.  If you
can build regular packages, you can use pacbuild.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060711/b639ed78/attachment.pgp>

From blum at drundrun.org  Wed Jul 12 02:20:32 2006
From: blum at drundrun.org (Blum)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 09:20:32 +0300
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060711111637.4dcb291d@aries>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<20060711111637.4dcb291d@aries>
Message-ID: <200607120920.32639.blum@drundrun.org>

On Tuesday 11 July 2006 21:16, Jason Chu wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 19:47:23 +0200
>
> Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:
> > Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> > ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> > one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
> > packages up to date in an acceptable time.
> >
> > Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
> > time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
> >
> > What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
> >
> > We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
> > Xentac. Read here more about it:
> >
> > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> > http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
> >
> > i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
> > pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
> > running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64
> > with pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
> >
> > Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
> > just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there
> > should be only official packages from current/extra and later
> > community on it. A separate system would be nice but is not a must.
>
> Actually, a clean system is barely needed.  Because the build daemon
> actually creates its own build chroot.
>
> Jason

I think I can help, I have a machine x86_64 24/7 uptime online and running 
arch. But tell me, what exactly means 'clean' system?



From slubman at slubman.net  Wed Jul 12 13:10:10 2006
From: slubman at slubman.net (slubman)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 19:10:10 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] How to add a machine to the compil farm ?
Message-ID: <200607121910.11059.slubman@slubman.net>

> Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
> packages up to date in an acceptable time.
>
> Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
> time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
>
> What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
>
> We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
> Xentac. Read here more about it:
>
> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
>
> i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
> pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
> running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64 with
> pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
>
> Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
> just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there should
> be only official packages from current/extra and later community on it.
> A separate system would be nice but is not a must.
>
> Don't be afraid. There's no need to have a ssh deamon running. The
> system should be online most time. 24/7 up would be great.
>
> I will also offer one or two systems. We will test the
> configuration.
>
> It would be great to have more systems later running the build daemon so
> the nice load would get much lower.
>
> So who will join the packaging party?
>
> AndyRTR

Hello

I wan't to add my arch64 to the "farm". Do i have to send the mail to the guy 
in the wiki, or is someone else responsible for the arch64 port ?

-- 
slubman (aka Nicolas DOUALOT)
mail: slubman at slubman.net
jabber ID: slubman at kdetalk.net
site: http://www.slubman.net



From jason at archlinux.org  Wed Jul 12 14:29:03 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 11:29:03 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <200607120920.32639.blum@drundrun.org>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<20060711111637.4dcb291d@aries>
	<200607120920.32639.blum@drundrun.org>
Message-ID: <20060712112903.7f7aed14@aries>

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 09:20:32 +0300
Blum <blum at drundrun.org> wrote:

> > Actually, a clean system is barely needed.  Because the build daemon
> > actually creates its own build chroot.
> >
> > Jason
> 
> I think I can help, I have a machine x86_64 24/7 uptime online and
> running arch. But tell me, what exactly means 'clean' system?

What Andy means by a clean system is one where you haven't installed a
lot of custom packages or programs.  That it'd be pretty easy to
re-create your system with an install cd and a bunch of pacman commands.

But, like I said, it really doesn't matter.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060712/9bd62e89/attachment.pgp>

From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Wed Jul 12 14:56:59 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 00:26:59 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>

Andreas Radke wrote:
> Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
> packages up to date in an acceptable time.
>
> Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
> time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
>
> What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
>
> We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
> Xentac. Read here more about it:
>
> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
>
> i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
> pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
> running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64 with
> pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
>
> Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
> just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there should
> be only official packages from current/extra and later community on it.
> A separate system would be nice but is not a must.
>
> Don't be afraid. There's no need to have a ssh deamon running. The
> system should be online most time. 24/7 up would be great.
>
> I will also offer one or two systems. We will test the
> configuration.
>
> It would be great to have more systems later running the build daemon so
> the nice load would get much lower.
>
> So who will join the packaging party?
>
> AndyRTR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>   
Count me in.

ganja_guru



From kth5 at archlinuxppc.org  Wed Jul 12 14:54:48 2006
From: kth5 at archlinuxppc.org (Alexander Baldeck)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:54:48 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [archppc] Kernel 2.6.17 Progress
In-Reply-To: <44A1C59A.7000402@archlinuxppc.org>
References: <55FA14DA-654E-4673-9541-60727200DE7A@calminferno.net>
	<44A1C59A.7000402@archlinuxppc.org>
Message-ID: <44B54578.5030502@archlinuxppc.org>

Alexander Baldeck wrote:
> James Turner wrote:
>   
>> I was just wondering how the 2.6.17 kernel progress was going.  I'm 
>> very excited to finally have Airport Extreme support right in the kernel.
>>     
> 2.6.17 is in testing right now and 2.6.17.1 is in the making already.  
> kernel-headers, glibc 2.4 and gcc 4.1.1 were just too much to test at 
> once for just one guy - me - alone, so i put them in testing rather than 
> current. ;) Have fun with kernel26-pmac in testing, if you find issues 
> lemme know.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Alex
2.6.17 along with gcc 4.1.1, glibc 2.4 and all the rest of testing have 
been moved down to current/extra. You should be able to get the kernel 
without too much risk... well, you know what I mean. ;)

In any case, as I hear some locals running arch on ppc reporting to me, 
the Airport Extreme card does not quite work stable yet. There's a few 
hickups it causes every now and then. For example never try to drive it 
at any more than 11Mbit/s or it may freeze your machine sooner or later.

Cheers!

Alex




From benoitc at archlinuxfr.org  Wed Jul 12 15:04:05 2006
From: benoitc at archlinuxfr.org (Benoit Chesneau)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:04:05 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [archppc] Kernel 2.6.17 Progress
In-Reply-To: <44B54578.5030502@archlinuxppc.org>
References: <55FA14DA-654E-4673-9541-60727200DE7A@calminferno.net>
	<44A1C59A.7000402@archlinuxppc.org>
	<44B54578.5030502@archlinuxppc.org>
Message-ID: <DF435FC4-99F5-46F9-91E4-5DA2F9F4CF55@archlinuxfr.org>

airport extrem works if you follow thhere steps :

1) iwconfig eth0 down (to close the firts interface)
2) iwconfig eth1 up
3) iwlist eth1 scan
4)iwconfig eth1 <ip>
5) iwconfig eth1 essid <ESSIDOFAP>

6) iwconfig eth1 enc <wepkey>


Hope it will be better :)

Beno?t

On Jul 12, 2006, at 8:54 PM, Alexander Baldeck wrote:

> Alexander Baldeck wrote:
>> James Turner wrote:
>>
>>> I was just wondering how the 2.6.17 kernel progress was going.  I'm
>>> very excited to finally have Airport Extreme support right in the  
>>> kernel.
>>>
>> 2.6.17 is in testing right now and 2.6.17.1 is in the making already.
>> kernel-headers, glibc 2.4 and gcc 4.1.1 were just too much to test at
>> once for just one guy - me - alone, so i put them in testing  
>> rather than
>> current. ;) Have fun with kernel26-pmac in testing, if you find  
>> issues
>> lemme know.
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> Alex
> 2.6.17 along with gcc 4.1.1, glibc 2.4 and all the rest of testing  
> have
> been moved down to current/extra. You should be able to get the kernel
> without too much risk... well, you know what I mean. ;)
>
> In any case, as I hear some locals running arch on ppc reporting to  
> me,
> the Airport Extreme card does not quite work stable yet. There's a few
> hickups it causes every now and then. For example never try to  
> drive it
> at any more than 11Mbit/s or it may freeze your machine sooner or  
> later.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Alex
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports




From howard.rob at gmail.com  Wed Jul 12 15:07:44 2006
From: howard.rob at gmail.com (Robert Howard)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:07:44 -0400
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>

What about kernels? I'm running Arch64, but I've built a custom kernel. This
would seem to be an issue if compiling kernel modules?

On 7/12/06, Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Andreas Radke wrote:
> > Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> > ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> > one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
> > packages up to date in an acceptable time.
> >
> > Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
> > time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
> >
> > What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
> >
> > We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
> > Xentac. Read here more about it:
> >
> > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> > http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
> >
> > i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
> > pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
> > running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64 with
> > pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
> >
> > Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
> > just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there should
> > be only official packages from current/extra and later community on it.
> > A separate system would be nice but is not a must.
> >
> > Don't be afraid. There's no need to have a ssh deamon running. The
> > system should be online most time. 24/7 up would be great.
> >
> > I will also offer one or two systems. We will test the
> > configuration.
> >
> > It would be great to have more systems later running the build daemon so
> > the nice load would get much lower.
> >
> > So who will join the packaging party?
> >
> > AndyRTR
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > arch-ports mailing list
> > arch-ports at archlinux.org
> > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
> >
> >
> Count me in.
>
> ganja_guru
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060712/0bae11e2/attachment.htm>

From a.radke at arcor.de  Wed Jul 12 15:22:40 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:22:40 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
	<9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>

Am Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:07:44 -0400
schrieb "Robert Howard" <howard.rob at gmail.com>:

> What about kernels? I'm running Arch64, but I've built a custom
> kernel. This would seem to be an issue if compiling kernel modules?

building packages running a custom kernel shouldn't make the package
different. should be ok.

andyrtr



From belanger at ASTRO.UMontreal.CA  Wed Jul 12 15:28:32 2006
From: belanger at ASTRO.UMontreal.CA (Eric Belanger)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:28:32 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10607121521500.4303-100000@orion>


On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Andreas Radke wrote:

> Am Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:07:44 -0400
> schrieb "Robert Howard" <howard.rob at gmail.com>:
> 
> > What about kernels? I'm running Arch64, but I've built a custom
> > kernel. This would seem to be an issue if compiling kernel modules?
> 
> building packages running a custom kernel shouldn't make the package
> different. should be ok.

That is not true for kernel modules. If the farm contains machines running
the stock vanilla and beyond kernels, then it might be possible for the
build script to chose these machines to compile the packages containing
modules. If that is too difficult to implement, these packages could be
compiled the "old-fashion" way by a person who has a 64bit machine, i.e.
not using the build farm.

Snowman

> 
> andyrtr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
> 
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> 
> 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.




From a.radke at arcor.de  Wed Jul 12 15:56:48 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:56:48 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10607121521500.4303-100000@orion>
References: <20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<Pine.GSO.4.10.10607121521500.4303-100000@orion>
Message-ID: <20060712215648.746c4db4@workstation64.home>

Am Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:28:32 -0400 (EDT)
schrieb Eric Belanger <belanger at ASTRO.UMontreal.CA>:

> That is not true for kernel modules. If the farm contains machines
> running the stock vanilla and beyond kernels, then it might be
> possible for the build script to chose these machines to compile the
> packages containing modules. If that is too difficult to implement,
> these packages could be compiled the "old-fashion" way by a person
> who has a 64bit machine, i.e. not using the build farm.
> 
> Snowman

Not needed. If kernel26 or kernel26-beyond are in makedepends pacbuild
will install them. Anyway they should be installed. But it's not a must
to have them booted.

andyrtr



From jason at archlinux.org  Wed Jul 12 16:44:01 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 13:44:01 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060712215648.746c4db4@workstation64.home>
References: <20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<Pine.GSO.4.10.10607121521500.4303-100000@orion>
	<20060712215648.746c4db4@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <20060712134401.1054760b@aries>

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:56:48 +0200
Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:

> Am Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:28:32 -0400 (EDT)
> schrieb Eric Belanger <belanger at ASTRO.UMontreal.CA>:
> 
> > That is not true for kernel modules. If the farm contains machines
> > running the stock vanilla and beyond kernels, then it might be
> > possible for the build script to chose these machines to compile the
> > packages containing modules. If that is too difficult to implement,
> > these packages could be compiled the "old-fashion" way by a person
> > who has a 64bit machine, i.e. not using the build farm.
> > 
> > Snowman
> 
> Not needed. If kernel26 or kernel26-beyond are in makedepends pacbuild
> will install them. Anyway they should be installed. But it's not a
> must to have them booted.
> 
> andyrtr

You don't even have to have them installed on the system.  Pacbuild
will install them in the chroot when it needs them (because packages
have makedepends on them).

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060712/e689fcb1/attachment.pgp>

From howard.rob at gmail.com  Wed Jul 12 21:55:07 2006
From: howard.rob at gmail.com (Robert Howard)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:55:07 -0400
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060712134401.1054760b@aries>
References: <20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<Pine.GSO.4.10.10607121521500.4303-100000@orion>
	<20060712215648.746c4db4@workstation64.home>
	<20060712134401.1054760b@aries>
Message-ID: <9e73f2cb0607121855y1a253d96lde54292ececed452@mail.gmail.com>

Great. I'll look into the possibility of adding my machine to the farm. Now,
does pacbuild require a separate partition for the chroot or can it just
dump the necessary files into a directory?

On 7/12/06, Jason Chu <jason at archlinux.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 21:56:48 +0200
> Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:
>
> > Am Wed, 12 Jul 2006 15:28:32 -0400 (EDT)
> > schrieb Eric Belanger <belanger at ASTRO.UMontreal.CA>:
> >
> > > That is not true for kernel modules. If the farm contains machines
> > > running the stock vanilla and beyond kernels, then it might be
> > > possible for the build script to chose these machines to compile the
> > > packages containing modules. If that is too difficult to implement,
> > > these packages could be compiled the "old-fashion" way by a person
> > > who has a 64bit machine, i.e. not using the build farm.
> > >
> > > Snowman
> >
> > Not needed. If kernel26 or kernel26-beyond are in makedepends pacbuild
> > will install them. Anyway they should be installed. But it's not a
> > must to have them booted.
> >
> > andyrtr
>
> You don't even have to have them installed on the system.  Pacbuild
> will install them in the chroot when it needs them (because packages
> have makedepends on them).
>
> Jason
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060712/4e603967/attachment.htm>

From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 13 06:38:06 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:08:06 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
	<9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <op.tcmihsut753pjd@localhost.localdomain>

I'm not too sure of this Andy. Remember a while back, when I was running a  
custom kernel, we tested out some packages for size and ours always  
differed by a couple of bytes? Both packages worked but we couldn't figure  
out why the file sizes were slightly different.

ganja_guru



>
> building packages running a custom kernel shouldn't make the package
> different. should be ok.
>
> andyrtr
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports





From howard.rob at gmail.com  Thu Jul 13 10:04:19 2006
From: howard.rob at gmail.com (Robert Howard)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 10:04:19 -0400
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <op.tcmihsut753pjd@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
	<9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<op.tcmihsut753pjd@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <9e73f2cb0607130704web7e90eyca3802fc6d2f1c7c@mail.gmail.com>

Were you both using identical hardware? CPUs? Compiler flags? This may seem
like an obvious line of questioning, but I've found that it always isn't.

Anyway, assuming that pacbuid is using a chroot for all the builds, it
should work independently of the currently running kernel and for that
matter, the currently running system. That said, what if a makefile tries to
use the current kernel version (uname -r) for something? Does pacbuild have
facilities for dealing with this sort of problem?

On 7/13/06, Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm not too sure of this Andy. Remember a while back, when I was running a
> custom kernel, we tested out some packages for size and ours always
> differed by a couple of bytes? Both packages worked but we couldn't figure
> out why the file sizes were slightly different.
>
> ganja_guru
>
>
>
> >
> > building packages running a custom kernel shouldn't make the package
> > different. should be ok.
> >
> > andyrtr
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > arch-ports mailing list
> > arch-ports at archlinux.org
> > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060713/5328bef3/attachment.htm>

From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 13 10:57:07 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 20:27:07 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <9e73f2cb0607130704web7e90eyca3802fc6d2f1c7c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>	<9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>	<20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>	<op.tcmihsut753pjd@localhost.localdomain>
	<9e73f2cb0607130704web7e90eyca3802fc6d2f1c7c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <44B65F43.4040208@gmail.com>

AFAIK, Andy was using Dual Opteron's and I was using an FX-55. Compiler 
flags were identical. Hardware differed slightly, I was using HW RAID, 
I'm not sure if Andy was using RAID or not.

ganja_guru

Robert Howard wrote:
> Were you both using identical hardware? CPUs? Compiler flags? This may 
> seem like an obvious line of questioning, but I've found that it 
> always isn't.
>
> Anyway, assuming that pacbuid is using a chroot for all the builds, it 
> should work independently of the currently running kernel and for that 
> matter, the currently running system. That said, what if a makefile 
> tries to use the current kernel version (uname -r) for something? Does 
> pacbuild have facilities for dealing with this sort of problem?
>




From jason at archlinux.org  Thu Jul 13 11:01:34 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 08:01:34 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <44B65F43.4040208@gmail.com>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
	<9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<op.tcmihsut753pjd@localhost.localdomain>
	<9e73f2cb0607130704web7e90eyca3802fc6d2f1c7c@mail.gmail.com>
	<44B65F43.4040208@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20060713080134.6d9816d2@localhost.localdomain>

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 20:27:07 +0530
Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com> wrote:

> AFAIK, Andy was using Dual Opteron's and I was using an FX-55.
> Compiler flags were identical. Hardware differed slightly, I was
> using HW RAID, I'm not sure if Andy was using RAID or not.
> 
> ganja_guru

Be aware that two identical builds even on the same machine will differ
slightly.  Things like modified dates will always be different (unless
this exact machine can have exactly the same state over both builds).
Even just taking modified dates into account, you could get packages of
different sizes.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060713/9a646b8a/attachment.pgp>

From jason at archlinux.org  Thu Jul 13 11:03:43 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 08:03:43 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <9e73f2cb0607130704web7e90eyca3802fc6d2f1c7c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
	<9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<op.tcmihsut753pjd@localhost.localdomain>
	<9e73f2cb0607130704web7e90eyca3802fc6d2f1c7c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20060713080343.69a03251@localhost.localdomain>

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 10:04:19 -0400
"Robert Howard" <howard.rob at gmail.com> wrote:

> Were you both using identical hardware? CPUs? Compiler flags? This
> may seem like an obvious line of questioning, but I've found that it
> always isn't.
> 
> Anyway, assuming that pacbuid is using a chroot for all the builds, it
> should work independently of the currently running kernel and for that
> matter, the currently running system. That said, what if a makefile
> tries to use the current kernel version (uname -r) for something?
> Does pacbuild have facilities for dealing with this sort of problem?

Pacbuild can't directly deal with this problem.  Strictly speaking, it
wasn't a very good idea when it was thought of, so pacbuild doesn't try
to fix it.  Instead, you just tell the person who wrote the package to
fix it ;)

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060713/63b947c6/attachment.pgp>

From a.radke at arcor.de  Thu Jul 13 11:07:41 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:07:41 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <44B65F43.4040208@gmail.com>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B545FB.1040000@gmail.com>
	<9e73f2cb0607121207s6af35dafq171f55d0b8f0ac5@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<op.tcmihsut753pjd@localhost.localdomain>
	<9e73f2cb0607130704web7e90eyca3802fc6d2f1c7c@mail.gmail.com>
	<44B65F43.4040208@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20060713170741.1664a001@workstation64.home>

Am Thu, 13 Jul 2006 20:27:07 +0530
schrieb Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com>:

> AFAIK, Andy was using Dual Opteron's and I was using an FX-55.
> Compiler flags were identical. Hardware differed slightly, I was
> using HW RAID, I'm not sure if Andy was using RAID or not.
> 
> ganja_guru
> 
> Robert Howard wrote:
> > Were you both using identical hardware? CPUs? Compiler flags? This
> > may seem like an obvious line of questioning, but I've found that
> > it always isn't.
> >
> > Anyway, assuming that pacbuid is using a chroot for all the builds,
> > it should work independently of the currently running kernel and
> > for that matter, the currently running system. That said, what if a
> > makefile tries to use the current kernel version (uname -r) for
> > something? Does pacbuild have facilities for dealing with this sort
> > of problem?
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports


No raid here but maybe different filesystems. So our systems may use
various numbers of blocks to store the same file. Not sure.

Andy



From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 13 11:36:45 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:06:45 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060712215648.746c4db4@workstation64.home>
References: <20060712212240.0c6cfb82@workstation64.home>
	<Pine.GSO.4.10.10607121521500.4303-100000@orion>
	<20060712215648.746c4db4@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <op.tcmwbjy1753pjd@localhost.localdomain>

I think we were both using XFS at the time. Anyway like Jason says, small  
size differences don't really matter.

ganja_guru

------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> No raid here but maybe different filesystems. So our systems may use
> various numbers of blocks to store the same file. Not sure.

> Andy



From blum at drundrun.org  Sun Jul 16 05:14:24 2006
From: blum at drundrun.org (Blum)
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 12:14:24 +0300
Subject: [arch-ports] How to add a machine to the compil farm ?
Message-ID: <200607161214.25302.blum@drundrun.org>

On Wednesday 12 July 2006 20:10, slubman wrote:
> > Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> > ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> > one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep all
> > packages up to date in an acceptable time.
> >
> > Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer their
> > time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
> >
> > What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
> >
> > We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool from
> > Xentac. Read here more about it:
> >
> > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> > http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
> >
> > i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to sent
> > pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further to a pc
> > running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have running Arch64 with
> > pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
> >
> > Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you need:
> > just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So there should
> > be only official packages from current/extra and later community on it.
> > A separate system would be nice but is not a must.
> >
> > Don't be afraid. There's no need to have a ssh deamon running. The
> > system should be online most time. 24/7 up would be great.
> >
> > I will also offer one or two systems. We will test the
> > configuration.
> >
> > It would be great to have more systems later running the build daemon so
> > the nice load would get much lower.
> >
> > So who will join the packaging party?
> >
> > AndyRTR
>
> Hello
>
> I wan't to add my arch64 to the "farm". Do i have to send the mail to the
> guy in the wiki, or is someone else responsible for the arch64 port ?

I cant't find an answer of this question too... I asked Jason for username and 
password for the x86_64 farm but no answer yet. 



From jason at archlinux.org  Sun Jul 16 11:17:06 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 08:17:06 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] How to add a machine to the compil farm ?
In-Reply-To: <200607161214.25302.blum@drundrun.org>
References: <200607161214.25302.blum@drundrun.org>
Message-ID: <20060716081706.5b598842@localhost.localdomain>

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 12:14:24 +0300
Blum <blum at drundrun.org> wrote:

> On Wednesday 12 July 2006 20:10, slubman wrote:
> > > Now that the x86_64 port is official we want to make it as good as
> > > ArchLinux (i686). You may have noticed that I'm doing most time a
> > > one-man-job. And that's now too much work for one person to keep
> > > all packages up to date in an acceptable time.
> > >
> > > Great news: i686 devs and also TUs want to help us. They offer
> > > their time to build the packages they maintain for a second time.
> > >
> > > What we need: a build farm running several machines Arch64.
> > >
> > > We will use pacbuild. The great distributed package building tool
> > > from Xentac. Read here more about it:
> > >
> > > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild and
> > > http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild
> > >
> > > i686 package maintainers and TrustedUsers will get accounts to
> > > sent pkgbuilds to the farm. The main server will send it further
> > > to a pc running the local build daemon. The more pcs we have
> > > running Arch64 with pacbuild daemon the lower the load will be.
> > >
> > > Who can offer his pc for running the pacbuild daemon? What you
> > > need: just a clean(!) Arch64 installation for correct linking. So
> > > there should be only official packages from current/extra and
> > > later community on it. A separate system would be nice but is not
> > > a must.
> > >
> > > Don't be afraid. There's no need to have a ssh deamon running. The
> > > system should be online most time. 24/7 up would be great.
> > >
> > > I will also offer one or two systems. We will test the
> > > configuration.
> > >
> > > It would be great to have more systems later running the build
> > > daemon so the nice load would get much lower.
> > >
> > > So who will join the packaging party?
> > >
> > > AndyRTR
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > I wan't to add my arch64 to the "farm". Do i have to send the mail
> > to the guy in the wiki, or is someone else responsible for the
> > arch64 port ?
> 
> I cant't find an answer of this question too... I asked Jason for
> username and password for the x86_64 farm but no answer yet. 

Sorry about that.  Your email's been sitting in my queue.  It's been a
busy week.  I'll hopefully get you an account today.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060716/175adee5/attachment.pgp>

From a.radke at arcor.de  Sun Jul 16 13:47:54 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 19:47:54 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] flyspray is open for 64bit bugs
Message-ID: <20060716194754.302de9aa@workstation64.home>

Go on. But don't flood it too much :)

AndyRTR



From a.radke at arcor.de  Sun Jul 16 16:07:58 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 22:07:58 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] new ISOs for testing out
In-Reply-To: <20060710205916.44e32cd9@workstation64.home>
References: <20060710205916.44e32cd9@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <20060716220758.408ef3f9@workstation64.home>

from the response i got the installation is going very well.

i had two users reporting grub installs but is not working. this is
weird because it's still the same old package. it would be nice if
somebody who knows that our package works for him will try installing
grub from the installer of the new isos.

we should improve grub for the future. i hope to get it compile
natively. but for now i don't time for that. other distributions are
adding more patches (frugal, gentoo...). you all may test them and
report if you find a good solution for your hardware. a good place for
searching is also the Cross-LFS book. They had recently a similar
discussion on their devel list.

before i want to declare them official i'd like to make sure that
grub also works if it is only a small fix. anyway with lilo all seems
fine.

AndyRTR



From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Mon Jul 17 10:40:27 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:10:27 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] amarok-base 1.4.1-1 in Arch64
Message-ID: <44BBA15B.8040800@gmail.com>

Hi everyone,

Does amarok-1.4.1 with the xine engine work ok for you in Arch64? I'm 
getting "xine-engine claims it cannot play MP3's". Please let me know so 
I can figure out if its a package problem or whether my installation is 
corrupt.


ganja_guru



From a.radke at arcor.de  Mon Jul 17 11:59:36 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:59:36 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] amarok-base 1.4.1-1 in Arch64
In-Reply-To: <44BBA15B.8040800@gmail.com>
References: <44BBA15B.8040800@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20060717175936.4baeaf7f@workstation64.home>

Am Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:10:27 +0530
schrieb Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com>:

> Hi everyone,
> 
> Does amarok-1.4.1 with the xine engine work ok for you in Arch64? I'm 
> getting "xine-engine claims it cannot play MP3's". Please let me know
> so I can figure out if its a package problem or whether my
> installation is corrupt.
> 
> 
> ganja_guru
> 
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports


I'm just playing an mp3 song using Xine-ui. No problems here.

AndyRTR



From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Mon Jul 17 14:49:19 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:19:19 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] amarok-base 1.4.1-1 in Arch64
In-Reply-To: <20060717175936.4baeaf7f@workstation64.home>
References: <44BBA15B.8040800@gmail.com>
	<20060717175936.4baeaf7f@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <44BBDBAF.4080901@gmail.com>

Andreas Radke wrote:
> Am Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:10:27 +0530
> schrieb Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com>:
>
>   
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Does amarok-1.4.1 with the xine engine work ok for you in Arch64? I'm 
>> getting "xine-engine claims it cannot play MP3's". Please let me know
>> so I can figure out if its a package problem or whether my
>> installation is corrupt.
>>
>>
>> ganja_guru
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> arch-ports mailing list
>> arch-ports at archlinux.org
>> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>>     
>
>
> I'm just playing an mp3 song using Xine-ui. No problems here.
>
> AndyRTR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>   
xine-ui? thats the GUI for xine.. I'm referring to amarok which uses the 
xine engine.

ganja_guru



From a.radke at arcor.de  Mon Jul 17 15:44:29 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 21:44:29 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] amarok-base 1.4.1-1 in Arch64
In-Reply-To: <44BBDBAF.4080901@gmail.com>
References: <44BBA15B.8040800@gmail.com>
	<20060717175936.4baeaf7f@workstation64.home>
	<44BBDBAF.4080901@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20060717214429.450eb11e@workstation64.home>


> xine-ui? thats the GUI for xine.. I'm referring to amarok which uses
> the xine engine.
> 
> ganja_guru

sry, mixed that. but amarok is working stable now here playing mp3s :)

andyrtr



From blum at drundrun.org  Tue Jul 18 09:15:14 2006
From: blum at drundrun.org (Blum)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:15:14 +0300
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <20060711114938.256ee304@aries>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B3EC69.5060008@nc.rr.com> <20060711114938.256ee304@aries>
Message-ID: <200607181615.14814.blum@drundrun.org>

On Tuesday 11 July 2006 21:49, Jason Chu wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:22:33 -0400
>
> Michael McCaskill <mmccaskill at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> > Excellent. I will install pacbuild when I get home. I'm behind a home
> > firewall. Do I need to open any ports?
>
> Nope, your build machine does all the talking to the server.  If you
> can build regular packages, you can use pacbuild.
>
> Jason

Is it any way to know if the strawberry daemon is working properly? Log, web 
report or something... I have it started, but for today there is no activity. 
Maybe there is no packages for building now or it's not logged in.. or there 
is something wrong? I guess i need some feedback :)

Blum



From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Tue Jul 18 11:54:34 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 21:24:34 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <200607181615.14814.blum@drundrun.org>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>	<44B3EC69.5060008@nc.rr.com>
	<20060711114938.256ee304@aries>
	<200607181615.14814.blum@drundrun.org>
Message-ID: <44BD043A.8070006@gmail.com>

Blum wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 July 2006 21:49, Jason Chu wrote:
>   
>> On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:22:33 -0400
>>
>> Michael McCaskill <mmccaskill at nc.rr.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> Excellent. I will install pacbuild when I get home. I'm behind a home
>>> firewall. Do I need to open any ports?
>>>       
>> Nope, your build machine does all the talking to the server.  If you
>> can build regular packages, you can use pacbuild.
>>
>> Jason
>>     
>
> Is it any way to know if the strawberry daemon is working properly? Log, web 
> report or something... I have it started, but for today there is no activity. 
> Maybe there is no packages for building now or it's not logged in.. or there 
> is something wrong? I guess i need some feedback :)
>
> Blum
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>   
I have the exact same question.

ganja_guru



From a.radke at arcor.de  Tue Jul 18 14:20:36 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:20:36 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <200607181615.14814.blum@drundrun.org>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B3EC69.5060008@nc.rr.com> <20060711114938.256ee304@aries>
	<200607181615.14814.blum@drundrun.org>
Message-ID: <20060718202036.5425b26a@workstation64.home>

> Is it any way to know if the strawberry daemon is working properly?
> Log, web report or something... I have it started, but for today
> there is no activity. Maybe there is no packages for building now or
> it's not logged in.. or there is something wrong? I guess i need some
> feedback :)
> 
> Blum

There's a webinterface for monitoring peach but not for strawberry. As
I told you we are still not using it. Just preparing it. You will
notice it one day when your hard disc led starts flashing. We will
inform you all when it starts. Stay cool.

AndyRTR



From jason at archlinux.org  Tue Jul 18 17:10:06 2006
From: jason at archlinux.org (Jason Chu)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 14:10:06 -0700
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] wanted: PCs for our pacbuild build farm
In-Reply-To: <200607181615.14814.blum@drundrun.org>
References: <20060711194723.7161ff53@workstation64.home>
	<44B3EC69.5060008@nc.rr.com> <20060711114938.256ee304@aries>
	<200607181615.14814.blum@drundrun.org>
Message-ID: <20060718141006.6121ccb7@aries>

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:15:14 +0300
Blum <blum at drundrun.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday 11 July 2006 21:49, Jason Chu wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:22:33 -0400
> >
> > Michael McCaskill <mmccaskill at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> > > Excellent. I will install pacbuild when I get home. I'm behind a
> > > home firewall. Do I need to open any ports?
> >
> > Nope, your build machine does all the talking to the server.  If you
> > can build regular packages, you can use pacbuild.
> >
> > Jason
> 
> Is it any way to know if the strawberry daemon is working properly?
> Log, web report or something... I have it started, but for today
> there is no activity. Maybe there is no packages for building now or
> it's not logged in.. or there is something wrong? I guess i need some
> feedback :)
> 
> Blum

When I release 0.4 it will have logging and a web report of the whole
build daemon.  I've been testing it because I bought an x86_64 just for
use as a build daemon.  You'll see some packages going through here and
there, but not too much.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20060718/465b3e11/attachment.pgp>

From a.radke at arcor.de  Thu Jul 20 17:51:24 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 23:51:24 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] extra ready for use on archlinux.org
Message-ID: <20060720235124.220401e1@workstation64.home>

I finished bringing all packages from arch64.org into the new extra repo
db on archlinux.org. If you still find a package laying on the ftp and
it's not in the repo db let me know.

Now I'm going to keep the repos up to date and fix bugs you report. A
new ISO is in work.

Community repo and AUR are up to you all out there.

From now on forget Arch64.org - it may rest in peace.

AndyRTR



From ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com  Thu Jul 20 21:22:30 2006
From: ganja.guru.x64 at gmail.com (Varun Acharya)
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 06:52:30 +0530
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] extra ready for use on archlinux.org
In-Reply-To: <20060720235124.220401e1@workstation64.home>
References: <20060720235124.220401e1@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <44C02C56.8040601@gmail.com>

Hi Andy,
www.arch64.org better not rest in peace cause it now points to 
www.archlinux.org. As we discussed earlier, please post a news item or 
get the ISO posted here :
http://www.archlinux.org/download/

ganja_guru

Andreas Radke wrote:
> I finished bringing all packages from arch64.org into the new extra repo
> db on archlinux.org. If you still find a package laying on the ftp and
> it's not in the repo db let me know.
>
> Now I'm going to keep the repos up to date and fix bugs you report. A
> new ISO is in work.
>
> Community repo and AUR are up to you all out there.
>
> >From now on forget Arch64.org - it may rest in peace.
>
> AndyRTR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
>   




From a.radke at arcor.de  Mon Jul 24 16:54:29 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 22:54:29 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] new ISOs for testing out
In-Reply-To: <20060710205916.44e32cd9@workstation64.home>
References: <20060710205916.44e32cd9@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <20060724225429.4c22b6f1@workstation64.home>


> And here they are: http://www.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/
> 
> AndyRTR
> 


Ok, next shot. I've just finished uploading a new base and ftp iso.
Full current cd will follow later.

Changes:

- glibc linker fixed
- mc/mplayer dependecies fixed
- memtest86+ included as a bootoption
- grub segfault fixed
- minor current updates until 2006-07-24

Please give feedback. This set should soon become our new final isos.

AndyRTR



From a.radke at arcor.de  Thu Jul 27 16:45:19 2006
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 22:45:19 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] [x86_64] Arch64 0.7.2 (Gimmick) Released
Message-ID: <20060727224519.1e5dfb63@workstation64.home>

After the migration to the Archlinux.org server a new set of isos is
available for download:

3 different isos: ftp-only(23MB), base(150MB) and full current(506MB).

Use a mirror ('mirror'/0.7.2/iso/x86_64/) or a torrent[2] to download.
You'll find all the interesting links on our Download[1] page.

Enjoy the official x86_64 port!


AndyRTR


[1] http://www.archlinux.org/download.php
[2] full    http://linuxtracker.org/torrents-details.php?id=2507
     base http://linuxtracker.org/torrents-details.php?id=2506
     ftp    http://linuxtracker.org/torrents-details.php?id=2505
     they will be soon linked in our download section