[2013-05-29 11:56:57 +1000] Allan McRae:
1) Fix any non-official packages with files in /bin, /sbin or /usr/sbin
to put those files in /usr/bin.
How should we handle paths that are hardcoded everywhere, such as
/usr/sbin/sendmail? Will the filesystem package ship a global symlink
from /usr/sbin
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 15 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 3 fully signed off packages
* 30 packages missing signoffs
* 2 packages older than 14 days
(Note:
On 29/05/13 17:57, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
[2013-05-29 11:56:57 +1000] Allan McRae:
1) Fix any non-official packages with files in /bin, /sbin or /usr/sbin
to put those files in /usr/bin.
How should we handle paths that are hardcoded everywhere, such as
/usr/sbin/sendmail? Will the filesystem
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:31 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
We discussed removing static libraries for most packages back in March [1].
Now makepkg for pacman-4.1 has an option staticlibs that automatically
removes them. Should I make that the default in our makepkg.conf?
Sounds
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:56 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
I'm bored of waiting... so lets do this!
Please do. I suppose people can still skip staging for packages where
that makes sense to minimize the congestion?
What a plans with regard to
[staging] in the near future?
If
Am Wed, 29 May 2013 10:03:29 +0200
schrieb Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org:
I doubt most of the static libraries our packages ship ever get used,
so I strongly support getting rid of all that dead weight (that's
115M on my system, for instance). If needed, we can explicitly re-add
Am 29.05.2013 03:31, schrieb Allan McRae:
We discussed removing static libraries for most packages back in March [1].
Now makepkg for pacman-4.1 has an option staticlibs that automatically
removes them. Should I make that the default in our makepkg.conf?
Allan
[1]
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
We discussed removing static libraries for most packages back in March [1].
Now makepkg for pacman-4.1 has an option staticlibs that automatically
removes them. Should I make that the default in our makepkg.conf?
Allan
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
I'm bored of waiting... so lets do this! What a plans with regard to
[staging] in the near future? When it is free, I will kill the current
TODO list and create a new one.
I just moved the openobex rebuild to the
On 30/05/13 02:31, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Am 29.05.2013 03:31, schrieb Allan McRae:
We discussed removing static libraries for most packages back in March [1].
Now makepkg for pacman-4.1 has an option staticlibs that automatically
removes them. Should I make that the default in our
On 30/05/13 06:23, Eric Bélanger wrote:
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
I'm bored of waiting... so lets do this! What a plans with regard to
[staging] in the near future? When it is free, I will kill the current
TODO list and create a new one.
11 matches
Mail list logo