From axelgenus at gmail.com  Sun May  6 06:13:51 2007
From: axelgenus at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Alessandro_Calor=C3=AC?=)
Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 12:13:51 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] New entry
Message-ID: <eeb7df810705060313j4b40a6dbi91b5779cd39d7e5e@mail.gmail.com>

Hi folks,

my name is Alessandro, I'm an Italian student of computer sience and
part-time employee of a company which designs and builds control
panels for industry plants and develops the relative software. I'm a
linux enthusiast.

I would like to help the Arch64 project in porting packages from i686
to x86-64 platforms. How can I do that? Do I need to be a TU?

Now I'm just translating some wiki docs to italian but I would like to
be more involved in this project.

Bye and thank you all, Alessandro.



From a.radke at arcor.de  Sun May  6 15:50:15 2007
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 21:50:15 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] New entry
In-Reply-To: <eeb7df810705060313j4b40a6dbi91b5779cd39d7e5e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <eeb7df810705060313j4b40a6dbi91b5779cd39d7e5e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20070506215015.5c3c38a1@workstation64.home>

Am Sun, 6 May 2007 12:13:51 +0200
schrieb "Alessandro Calor?" <axelgenus at gmail.com>:

> I would like to help the Arch64 project in porting packages from i686
> to x86-64 platforms. How can I do that? Do I need to be a TU?

porting current and extra is done. we keep it now up to date as best as
we can.

community repo is still lacking. to help out there you would need to
become a TU. go on and read their rules in our wiki-

AndyRTR



From axelgenus at gmail.com  Sun May  6 17:18:57 2007
From: axelgenus at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Alessandro_Calor=C3=AC?=)
Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 23:18:57 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] New entry
In-Reply-To: <20070506215015.5c3c38a1@workstation64.home>
References: <eeb7df810705060313j4b40a6dbi91b5779cd39d7e5e@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070506215015.5c3c38a1@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <eeb7df810705061418g5d766392w2df67b0e80682361@mail.gmail.com>

2007/5/6, Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de>:
> porting current and extra is done. we keep it now up to date as best as
> we can.

Yes, I mean exactly that: keeping packages updated with official i686
repos (current and extra). Arch64 is the first *real* pure 64-bit
distro I've ever used and it's awesome!

> community repo is still lacking. to help out there you would need to
> become a TU. go on and read their rules in our wiki-

Ok, thank you. I'm going to do as much as I can.

> AndyRTR

Bye, Alessandro.



From a.radke at arcor.de  Tue May  8 18:42:06 2007
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 00:42:06 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
Message-ID: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>

congratulation. we have won!

our gcc-gcj is broken due to a major feature addon the developer made
right before he orphaned it. we (Hussam who does i686 rc packages and
me) are no more able to build OpenOffice.org standing a few days before
the 2.2.1 release candidate. this is not to blaim that developer but for
any other developer and all users not using the testing repo.

but this is only the peak of all the chaotic "development" as we call
it. untill now we used have one ArchLinux tree now having two
architectures officially supported (i686+x86_64) based on simplicity and
pacman repo manager as its basic parts. Having the latest stable package
version was the goal. we have put more and more packages into the
current+extra repos. important packages we want to test for a while in
our "testing" repos. sadly it's not worth the name. almost nobody uses
it. even not all developers as highly recommended. continously we put
packages with major issues into the stable repos.

we from the x86_64 port are only 2 guys rebuilding and maintaining
~2500 packages. we have not the power and possebility to change
anything important.

from my point of view we have passed a point where this concept won't
work anymore. we have a poor developement infrastructure compared to
other distributions. we slow down our package release process due to
many developers beeing busy with other things (real life and more). but
then we force us to push things very quickly into the repos to satisfy
our own old goals.

well. not more with me beeing responsible for the Arch x86_64 port.

some ways are possible: 

1) improve the infrastructure and increase the manpower of developers
and packagers for all supported dramatically. we are trying that for
over a year now without any noticable real success.

2) dramatically lower the work(=less binary packages) for the devs to
give them time for making packages of a better quality. doubt came up
as Arch should remain a supported binary distribution in most parts.

3) new goals for ArchLinux: accept to have not well tested packages
when we want to keep the update speed or accept a lower speed on update
to get new packages better tested.

4) split the goals we have! let's have one more conservative stable
rolling rellease tree for higher quality and one on the bleading edge
front accepting it might break sometime.



I've brought it up several times: i'm no more willing to be the dump
rebuild monkey.

wha i suggest is a mix of 3) and 4). 

there is only one working other distribution based on pacman out
claiming having a stable tree. I've talked to several devs and users
and they can imagine that a stable distribution by ArchLinux can become
a successor.

I'm going to start a new project based on what we now call ArchLinux
for a new more stable but easy to maintain distribution. I would like to
do this for ArchLinux. But I have also no problem if you totally dislike
that and say it's a NoGo under the name of ArchLinux.

Everybody who wants to help out or has something to say may post
here or contact me on one of my instant messenger accounts you find in
the forum.

AndyRTR



From axelgenus at gmail.com  Wed May  9 04:58:14 2007
From: axelgenus at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Alessandro_Calor=C3=AC?=)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 10:58:14 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>

2007/5/9, Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de>:
> we from the x86_64 port are only 2 guys rebuilding and maintaining
> ~2500 packages. we have not the power and possebility to change
> anything important.

I didn't imagine you were just two guys keeping up this work. How
could you manage all that work (and in such a good way)?

> 1) improve the infrastructure and increase the manpower of developers
> and packagers for all supported dramatically. we are trying that for
> over a year now without any noticable real success.

That's a hard task to achieve because becoming a TU is really hard
(Arch user from three months, keeping up packages on AUR for a long
time...).

> 2) dramatically lower the work(=less binary packages) for the devs to
> give them time for making packages of a better quality. doubt came up
> as Arch should remain a supported binary distribution in most parts.

This would not respect the "Arch way" to be a bleeding edge distro...

> 3) new goals for ArchLinux: accept to have not well tested packages
> when we want to keep the update speed or accept a lower speed on update
> to get new packages better tested.

In this case the differences from the i686 distro would increase,
making the development more "chaotic"...

> 4) split the goals we have! let's have one more conservative stable
> rolling rellease tree for higher quality and one on the bleading edge
> front accepting it might break sometime.

That's exactly what we have right now!

The stable and extra repositories should contain only "stable"
packages but in Arch the term "stable" assume a custom meaning:
packages that compile, don't block and don't give major troubles using
them. An example: GNOME and Esound daemon, considered "stable" either
for i686 or x86-64, don't work togheter because ESD locks up
gnome-panel during start-up (you need to manually restart the service
to unlock it); in many other distros this is not considerable
"stable".

> there is only one working other distribution based on pacman out
> claiming having a stable tree. I've talked to several devs and users
> and they can imagine that a stable distribution by ArchLinux can become
> a successor.

I agree.

> Everybody who wants to help out or has something to say may post
> here or contact me on one of my instant messenger accounts you find in
> the forum.

I would like to help (again) either in Arch project or out of it. If
you need, just tell me where and when! ;)

> AndyRTR

Bye, Alessandro.



From noahlorenzen at gmail.com  Wed May  9 09:18:01 2007
From: noahlorenzen at gmail.com (Noah Lorenzen)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 13:18:01 +0000
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d75a6b440705090618r46a4b28s37412637293ff76f@mail.gmail.com>

So does this mean the end of Arch64 as we know it? :(

On 5/9/07, Alessandro Calor? <axelgenus at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2007/5/9, Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de>:
> > we from the x86_64 port are only 2 guys rebuilding and maintaining
> > ~2500 packages. we have not the power and possebility to change
> > anything important.
>
> I didn't imagine you were just two guys keeping up this work. How
> could you manage all that work (and in such a good way)?
>
> > 1) improve the infrastructure and increase the manpower of developers
> > and packagers for all supported dramatically. we are trying that for
> > over a year now without any noticable real success.
>
> That's a hard task to achieve because becoming a TU is really hard
> (Arch user from three months, keeping up packages on AUR for a long
> time...).
>
> > 2) dramatically lower the work(=less binary packages) for the devs to
> > give them time for making packages of a better quality. doubt came up
> > as Arch should remain a supported binary distribution in most parts.
>
> This would not respect the "Arch way" to be a bleeding edge distro...
>
> > 3) new goals for ArchLinux: accept to have not well tested packages
> > when we want to keep the update speed or accept a lower speed on update
> > to get new packages better tested.
>
> In this case the differences from the i686 distro would increase,
> making the development more "chaotic"...
>
> > 4) split the goals we have! let's have one more conservative stable
> > rolling rellease tree for higher quality and one on the bleading edge
> > front accepting it might break sometime.
>
> That's exactly what we have right now!
>
> The stable and extra repositories should contain only "stable"
> packages but in Arch the term "stable" assume a custom meaning:
> packages that compile, don't block and don't give major troubles using
> them. An example: GNOME and Esound daemon, considered "stable" either
> for i686 or x86-64, don't work togheter because ESD locks up
> gnome-panel during start-up (you need to manually restart the service
> to unlock it); in many other distros this is not considerable
> "stable".
>
> > there is only one working other distribution based on pacman out
> > claiming having a stable tree. I've talked to several devs and users
> > and they can imagine that a stable distribution by ArchLinux can become
> > a successor.
>
> I agree.
>
> > Everybody who wants to help out or has something to say may post
> > here or contact me on one of my instant messenger accounts you find in
> > the forum.
>
> I would like to help (again) either in Arch project or out of it. If
> you need, just tell me where and when! ;)
>
> > AndyRTR
>
> Bye, Alessandro.
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>



From roman.kyrylych at gmail.com  Wed May  9 10:08:24 2007
From: roman.kyrylych at gmail.com (Roman Kyrylych)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 17:08:24 +0300
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <577f15290705090708l38e3642cke1c866b3ab806b19@mail.gmail.com>

2007/5/9, Alessandro Calor? <axelgenus at gmail.com>:
> 2007/5/9, Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de>:
> > we from the x86_64 port are only 2 guys rebuilding and maintaining
> > ~2500 packages. we have not the power and possebility to change
> > anything important.
>
> I didn't imagine you were just two guys keeping up this work. How
> could you manage all that work (and in such a good way)?

While speaking about man-power: are there some capable users willing
to maintain x86_64 packages?
Andy,  if you know such people that are willing to become devs -
please bring them on. I'm sure devs will vote for them.
Also, will JGC be maintaining x86_64 of Gnome now?

What's the status of pacbuild? That would help much too.

>
> > 1) improve the infrastructure and increase the manpower of developers
> > and packagers for all supported dramatically. we are trying that for
> > over a year now without any noticable real success.
>
> That's a hard task to achieve because becoming a TU is really hard
> (Arch user from three months, keeping up packages on AUR for a long
> time...).

Is it?
AFAIR there were no candidate voted down.
To become TU you need only to post short introduction message to tur-users ML.
The procedure of becoming a TU is not that hard, really (though, I
must confess I was a bit scary to write my introduction :-) )
BTW, what's your AUR login?

>
> > 2) dramatically lower the work(=less binary packages) for the devs to
> > give them time for making packages of a better quality. doubt came up
> > as Arch should remain a supported binary distribution in most parts.
>
> This would not respect the "Arch way" to be a bleeding edge distro...

That could be also archieved by offloading many uncommon packages to
Community repo.
Yeah, that will require more TUs, but they are easier to find,
especially when we will do a good announcement (so to reduce the fear
to be rejected).
On the other hand it would be very good if some existent TUs become
devs (and give out their packages and switched to maintaining official
repos only, to reduce workload).

>
> > 3) new goals for ArchLinux: accept to have not well tested packages
> > when we want to keep the update speed or accept a lower speed on update
> > to get new packages better tested.
>
> In this case the differences from the i686 distro would increase,
> making the development more "chaotic"...
>
> > 4) split the goals we have! let's have one more conservative stable
> > rolling rellease tree for higher quality and one on the bleading edge
> > front accepting it might break sometime.
>
> That's exactly what we have right now!
>
> The stable and extra repositories should contain only "stable"
> packages but in Arch the term "stable" assume a custom meaning:
> packages that compile, don't block and don't give major troubles using
> them. An example: GNOME and Esound daemon, considered "stable" either
> for i686 or x86-64, don't work togheter because ESD locks up
> gnome-panel during start-up (you need to manually restart the service
> to unlock it); in many other distros this is not considerable
> "stable".

Agree.
(even though ESD + Gnome always worked fine to me)

>
> > there is only one working other distribution based on pacman out
> > claiming having a stable tree. I've talked to several devs and users
> > and they can imagine that a stable distribution by ArchLinux can become
> > a successor.
>
> I agree.
>
> > Everybody who wants to help out or has something to say may post
> > here or contact me on one of my instant messenger accounts you find in
> > the forum.
>
> I would like to help (again) either in Arch project or out of it. If
> you need, just tell me where and when! ;)
>

I didn't understand what you meant here, Andy (about distro).

-- 
Roman Kyrylych (????? ???????)

From axelgenus at gmail.com  Wed May  9 12:37:55 2007
From: axelgenus at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Q2Fsb3LDrA==?= Alessandro)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 18:37:55 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <577f15290705090708l38e3642cke1c866b3ab806b19@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
	<577f15290705090708l38e3642cke1c866b3ab806b19@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20070509183755.5d138c85@coreblack.brightsky>

Il giorno Wed, 9 May 2007 17:08:24 +0300
"Roman Kyrylych" <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> ha scritto:

> To become TU you need only to post short introduction message to
> tur-users ML. The procedure of becoming a TU is not that hard, really
> (though, I must confess I was a bit scary to write my
> introduction :-) ) BTW, what's your AUR login?

I'm an Arch user from just about 1 month and an Arch64 user from
two weeks but I'm a linux user since 2004... my nick in AUR is
"axelgenus".

However, I read the "requisites" to be a TU and they are somewhat
discouraging... I mean:

1) maintain packages on community repo, yes of course but what
packages? The best and more useful packages are owned by TUs... Now I'm
writing a PKGBUILD for Neverwinter Nights' linux client but how many
people will find it useful? It needs to download about 1GB from the
bioware server (client + game resources).

2) be well regarded by the comunity... ok, that's obvious but how can I
achieve this? I've been a Gentoo user for 2 years and I can't remember
just one nick of the people who helped me on the forums... I hope
italian users like me find the translations I'm going to do on the wiki
useful.

3) be prepared to stay six months in the TU position... I've never made
such long-term programs! If I become a TU is because I wanted to... why
should I be forced to stay in TU position?

> That could be also archieved by offloading many uncommon packages to
> Community repo.

That's a great idea but I would like the package in community repo to
be assigned both to the maintainer and the contributor. Example: I
write the PKGBUILD for the program "foo"; if it's moved to community I
can't continue to maintain the package because I'm not a TU. This
only adds more work to TUs!

> On the other hand it would be very good if some existent TUs become
> devs (and give out their packages and switched to maintaining official
> repos only, to reduce workload).

I don't actually know how are devs and TU organized yet but I can
suggest you one thing: as I said before it would be very useful if a
contributor can maintain a package after it's added to the community
repo. The maintainer should only watch over some contributors revising their work.

However: why packages are builded manually? Can't they be builded
automatically on some dedicated servers (at least one for each arch).

> ESD + Gnome always worked fine to me

Lucky man!

> I didn't understand what you meant here, Andy (about distro).

I guess he want to split Arch64 from Arch to another separate distro.

Bye, Alessandro.



From a.radke at arcor.de  Wed May  9 13:12:22 2007
From: a.radke at arcor.de (Andreas Radke)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 19:12:22 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <d75a6b440705090618r46a4b28s37412637293ff76f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
	<d75a6b440705090618r46a4b28s37412637293ff76f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20070509191222.23e43c4b@workstation64.home>

Am Wed, 9 May 2007 13:18:01 +0000
schrieb "Noah Lorenzen" <noahlorenzen at gmail.com>:

> So does this mean the end of Arch64 as we know it? :(

probably yes. there's only a small chance to achive my personal goals
together with i686 ArchLinux developers from now on. huge changes would
have to be done very soon. and no more promises.

but expect any other x86_64 project/fork/distribution i would
start not beeing worse than Arch64 :P

AndyRTR



From noahlorenzen at gmail.com  Wed May  9 13:30:05 2007
From: noahlorenzen at gmail.com (Noah Lorenzen)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 11:30:05 -0600
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <20070509191222.23e43c4b@workstation64.home>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
	<d75a6b440705090618r46a4b28s37412637293ff76f@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070509191222.23e43c4b@workstation64.home>
Message-ID: <d75a6b440705091030l7395abe4k17c1691b7c56f8a3@mail.gmail.com>

So if you make a new fork/distro, how similar to Arch will it be? Do you
plan on making it very different than how Arch currently is? I would be very
interested in helping the project, but I don't know how to program... I'll
try to do what I can.

On 5/9/07, Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:
>
> Am Wed, 9 May 2007 13:18:01 +0000
> schrieb "Noah Lorenzen" <noahlorenzen at gmail.com>:
>
> > So does this mean the end of Arch64 as we know it? :(
>
> probably yes. there's only a small chance to achive my personal goals
> together with i686 ArchLinux developers from now on. huge changes would
> have to be done very soon. and no more promises.
>
> but expect any other x86_64 project/fork/distribution i would
> start not beeing worse than Arch64 :P
>
> AndyRTR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch-ports mailing list
> arch-ports at archlinux.org
> http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-ports
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-ports/attachments/20070509/ed589ab2/attachment.htm>

From roman.kyrylych at gmail.com  Wed May  9 13:34:50 2007
From: roman.kyrylych at gmail.com (Roman Kyrylych)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 20:34:50 +0300
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <20070509183755.5d138c85@coreblack.brightsky>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
	<577f15290705090708l38e3642cke1c866b3ab806b19@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070509183755.5d138c85@coreblack.brightsky>
Message-ID: <577f15290705091034r27f3c21bo8ec8bbe304be6d6@mail.gmail.com>

2007/5/9, Calor? Alessandro <axelgenus at gmail.com>:
> Il giorno Wed, 9 May 2007 17:08:24 +0300
> "Roman Kyrylych" <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
> > To become TU you need only to post short introduction message to
> > tur-users ML. The procedure of becoming a TU is not that hard, really
> > (though, I must confess I was a bit scary to write my
> > introduction :-) ) BTW, what's your AUR login?
>
> I'm an Arch user from just about 1 month and an Arch64 user from
> two weeks but I'm a linux user since 2004... my nick in AUR is
> "axelgenus".
>
> However, I read the "requisites" to be a TU and they are somewhat
> discouraging... I mean:
>
> 1) maintain packages on community repo, yes of course but what
> packages? The best and more useful packages are owned by TUs... Now I'm
> writing a PKGBUILD for Neverwinter Nights' linux client but how many
> people will find it useful? It needs to download about 1GB from the
> bioware server (client + game resources).
>
> 2) be well regarded by the comunity... ok, that's obvious but how can I
> achieve this? I've been a Gentoo user for 2 years and I can't remember
> just one nick of the people who helped me on the forums... I hope
> italian users like me find the translations I'm going to do on the wiki
> useful.
>
> 3) be prepared to stay six months in the TU position... I've never made
> such long-term programs! If I become a TU is because I wanted to... why
> should I be forced to stay in TU position?
>

Hmm, I cannot find such text anywhere.
Where did you read this?
In fact, in order to become a TU nothing of the above is required.
TUs should just know that you have enough skills for package building,
porting and fixing (applying x86_64 specific patches etc.) and to vote
"yes" for you.
Having some packages is not _required_, there are other ways to show
your skills.
You can find a sponsor before or after the introductory message to
tur-users ML (usually someone volunteers to sponsor a candidate).
If at least one TU (your sponsor) finds you a good candidate, the
discussion period and voting procedure begins.

> > That could be also archieved by offloading many uncommon packages to
> > Community repo.
>
> That's a great idea but I would like the package in community repo to
> be assigned both to the maintainer and the contributor. Example: I
> write the PKGBUILD for the program "foo"; if it's moved to community I
> can't continue to maintain the package because I'm not a TU. This
> only adds more work to TUs!
That's about CVS/SVN/whatever access rights.
Also, often a package in unsupported has many contributors over time,
because people orphan and readopt it.
You can send updated PKGBUILDs to maintainer directly or post in comments.
Posting PKGBUILD as a comment (after TU adopted it) doesn't differ
much from uploading new version to unsupported (before adoption).

>
> > On the other hand it would be very good if some existent TUs become
> > devs (and give out their packages and switched to maintaining official
> > repos only, to reduce workload).
>
> I don't actually know how are devs and TU organized yet but I can
> suggest you one thing: as I said before it would be very useful if a
> contributor can maintain a package after it's added to the community
> repo. The maintainer should only watch over some contributors revising their work.

See above.
BTW, there are cases where non-devs/non-TUs send updated patches that
devs/TUs just review and commit to CVS.

>
> However: why packages are builded manually? Can't they be builded
> automatically on some dedicated servers (at least one for each arch).

Pacbuild is on the way.

-- 
Roman Kyrylych (????? ???????)

From axelgenus at gmail.com  Thu May 10 02:41:14 2007
From: axelgenus at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Q2Fsb3LDrA==?= Alessandro)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 08:41:14 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <577f15290705091034r27f3c21bo8ec8bbe304be6d6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
	<577f15290705090708l38e3642cke1c866b3ab806b19@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070509183755.5d138c85@coreblack.brightsky>
	<577f15290705091034r27f3c21bo8ec8bbe304be6d6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20070510084114.1455cdd1@coreblack.brightsky>

Il giorno Wed, 9 May 2007 20:34:50 +0300
"Roman Kyrylych" <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Hmm, I cannot find such text anywhere.
> Where did you read this?

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/TU_Person_Specification

> In fact, in order to become a TU nothing of the above is required.
> TUs should just know that you have enough skills for package building,
> porting and fixing (applying x86_64 specific patches etc.) and to vote
> "yes" for you.
> Having some packages is not _required_, there are other ways to show
> your skills.
> You can find a sponsor before or after the introductory message to
> tur-users ML (usually someone volunteers to sponsor a candidate).
> If at least one TU (your sponsor) finds you a good candidate, the
> discussion period and voting procedure begins.

Ah, I see... so if I want to become a TU I have to introduce myself to
the TUs mailing list and to prove my skills... uhm... my mail is on the
road! ^___^

(I'm going to write the introduction mail to TU ML after I'll come back
home from work...).

> That's about CVS/SVN/whatever access rights.

Yes I know... I'm a developer and I worked with Subversion before but I
guess it's possible to implement a kind of "queue" in AUR that
maintainers can watch. 

> Also, often a package in unsupported has many contributors over time,
> because people orphan and readopt it.

Well, that's not a problem... when an AUR user want to adopt a package
I guess it's registered in a database. A script could give temporary
access to the particular CVS/SVN directory of the package to the
contributor (yes, I know it's not that simple but this really needs to
be semplified).

> You can send updated PKGBUILDs to maintainer directly or post in
> comments. Posting PKGBUILD as a comment (after TU adopted it) doesn't
> differ much from uploading new version to unsupported (before
> adoption).

I've already done this for a package in AUR (Transmission): I rewrote
the PKGBUILD, I sent it as a comment and then... nothing. I emailed the
new PKGBUILD to the maintainer... still nothing. When I wrote on the
forum, another TU asked me to send the package to mOlOk because the
maintainer wanted to drop it! Then he reviewed and replaced the old
package with mine ( plus some diffs :p ).

> Pacbuild is on the way.

That's will lightify the work of TUs but packages still need to be
patched and then WELL tested...

Bye, Alessandro.



From roman.kyrylych at gmail.com  Thu May 10 02:50:59 2007
From: roman.kyrylych at gmail.com (Roman Kyrylych)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 09:50:59 +0300
Subject: [arch-ports] going to start a new ArchLinux?
In-Reply-To: <20070510084114.1455cdd1@coreblack.brightsky>
References: <20070509004206.55b00e0a@workstation64.home>
	<eeb7df810705090158j100c077tcd2e36c12c7f9dec@mail.gmail.com>
	<577f15290705090708l38e3642cke1c866b3ab806b19@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070509183755.5d138c85@coreblack.brightsky>
	<577f15290705091034r27f3c21bo8ec8bbe304be6d6@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070510084114.1455cdd1@coreblack.brightsky>
Message-ID: <577f15290705092350l2d07b3dbuf1c0631458597eed@mail.gmail.com>

2007/5/10, Calor? Alessandro <axelgenus at gmail.com>:

> > You can send updated PKGBUILDs to maintainer directly or post in
> > comments. Posting PKGBUILD as a comment (after TU adopted it) doesn't
> > differ much from uploading new version to unsupported (before
> > adoption).
>
> I've already done this for a package in AUR (Transmission): I rewrote
> the PKGBUILD, I sent it as a comment and then... nothing. I emailed the
> new PKGBUILD to the maintainer... still nothing. When I wrote on the
> forum, another TU asked me to send the package to mOlOk because the
> maintainer wanted to drop it! Then he reviewed and replaced the old
> package with mine ( plus some diffs :p ).
>

Ah, so that was you. :-)

-- 
Roman Kyrylych (????? ???????)

From sacarde at tiscali.it  Sun May 20 08:42:06 2007
From: sacarde at tiscali.it (sacarde)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 14:42:06 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] archlinux-ppc on my mini-ppc
Message-ID: <200705201442.08167.sacarde@tiscali.it>

hi,
  I try to install archlinux-ppc on my mini-ppc /dev/hda4 (with iso 28/8/2006)

I have kubuntu already running on /dev/hda3 OK

I have this yaboot.conf:


boot=/dev/hda2
device=/pci at f4000000/ata-6 at d/disk at 0:
partition=3
root=/dev/hda3
timeout=50
install=/usr/lib/yaboot/yaboot
magicboot=/usr/lib/yaboot/ofboot
enablecdboot

enableofboot

image=/boot/vmlinux
        label=Linux
        read-only
        initrd=/boot/initrd.img

image=hd:4,/boot/vmlinux26
        label=arch
        root=/dev/hda4
        partition=4
        initrd=/boot/kernel26.img
        read-only


but arch load kernel and then have kernel-panic...... fstab seems OK

can you help me ?


thankyou



From sacarde at tiscali.it  Sun May 20 12:05:49 2007
From: sacarde at tiscali.it (sacarde)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 18:05:49 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] archlinux-ppc on my mini-ppc
In-Reply-To: <200705201442.08167.sacarde@tiscali.it>
References: <200705201442.08167.sacarde@tiscali.it>
Message-ID: <200705201805.50370.sacarde@tiscali.it>

Alle domenica 20 maggio 2007, sacarde ha scritto:

error is:
...
loading root filesystem module
initramfs completed / control passing to kinit
cannot open root device hda4(3,4)
kinit init not found
kernel panic



sacarde at tiscali.it



From kth5 at archlinuxppc.org  Sun May 20 15:19:44 2007
From: kth5 at archlinuxppc.org (Alexander Baldeck)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 21:19:44 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] archlinux-ppc on my mini-ppc
In-Reply-To: <200705201805.50370.sacarde@tiscali.it>
References: <200705201442.08167.sacarde@tiscali.it>
	<200705201805.50370.sacarde@tiscali.it>
Message-ID: <46509F50.8060101@archlinuxppc.org>

sacarde wrote:
> Alle domenica 20 maggio 2007, sacarde ha scritto:
> 
> error is:
> ...
> loading root filesystem module
> initramfs completed / control passing to kinit
> cannot open root device hda4(3,4)
> kinit init not found
> kernel panic
> 
You also have to tell it where to load the /boot/kernel26.img from. ;)
Btw, you see the arch logo on the upper left right?

Cheers,

-O



From sacarde at tiscali.it  Mon May 21 05:03:04 2007
From: sacarde at tiscali.it (sacarde)
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 11:03:04 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] archlinux-ppc on my mini-ppc
In-Reply-To: <200705201805.50370.sacarde@tiscali.it>
References: <200705201442.08167.sacarde@tiscali.it>
	<200705201805.50370.sacarde@tiscali.it>
Message-ID: <200705211103.05174.sacarde@tiscali.it>

Alle domenica 20 maggio 2007, sacarde ha scritto:
> Alle domenica 20 maggio 2007, sacarde ha scritto:

I retry folowing step by step 
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Install_Arch_Linux_PPC

but when I installed system base from ftp... (in chroot)

and I try to install kernel I have error:

error: failed to prepare transaction (non enough space on disk)
:: 19.8 MB required, have 0.0 MB

but I have 19GB free on that partition


can you help me ?




sacarde at tiscali.it



From sacarde at tiscali.it  Mon May 21 10:58:17 2007
From: sacarde at tiscali.it (sacarde)
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 16:58:17 +0200
Subject: [arch-ports] archlinux-ppc on my mini-ppc
In-Reply-To: <1179745783.5247.17.camel@localhost>
References: <200705201442.08167.sacarde@tiscali.it>
	<200705211103.05174.sacarde@tiscali.it>
	<1179745783.5247.17.camel@localhost>
Message-ID: <200705211658.17400.sacarde@tiscali.it>

Alle luned? 21 maggio 2007, hai scritto:
> I guess you aren't yet chrooted and pacman tries to install the kernel
> into the ramdisk.

no no
I am sure in chroot

I have run:

ln -s /proc/mounts /etc/mtab

and now pacman work OK

thankyou