Re: [arch-dev-public] migrate libusb1 to libusb and add libusb-compat to [core]
On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 17:16 +0100, Tobias Powalowski wrote: - libusb1 is the successor of libusb 0.1.x - Jan moved this lib into extra in order to allow to build packages wich need libusb 1.x - Now some programs still need libusb 0.1.x functions. The upstream developers created a wrapper for this called libusb-compat The plan is to replace the old unmaintained libusb 0.1.x with the new maintained one. The libusb1 package will die and will be replaced by the libusb package which moves to 1.x series. A new package libusb-compat will be created which support old programs that are not yet libusb 1.x ready. All packages which still need the old functions should be rebuilt against libusb-compat. Hope this clears some things. greetings tpowa Life would be so much easier if we wouldn't mess so much. Why didn't we choose for the easy solution? libusb1 (extra) - libusb1 (core). No rebuilds required libusb (core) - libusb-compat (core). Some replaces/provides/conflicts and we're done.
Re: [arch-dev-public] migrate libusb1 to libusb and add libusb-compat to [core]
On 29/11/10 18:25, Jan de Groot wrote: On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 17:16 +0100, Tobias Powalowski wrote: - libusb1 is the successor of libusb 0.1.x - Jan moved this lib into extra in order to allow to build packages wich need libusb 1.x - Now some programs still need libusb 0.1.x functions. The upstream developers created a wrapper for this called libusb-compat The plan is to replace the old unmaintained libusb 0.1.x with the new maintained one. The libusb1 package will die and will be replaced by the libusb package which moves to 1.x series. A new package libusb-compat will be created which support old programs that are not yet libusb 1.x ready. All packages which still need the old functions should be rebuilt against libusb-compat. Hope this clears some things. greetings tpowa Life would be so much easier if we wouldn't mess so much. Why didn't we choose for the easy solution? libusb1 (extra) - libusb1 (core). No rebuilds required libusb (core) - libusb-compat (core). Some replaces/provides/conflicts and we're done. Because libusb1 is an ugly package name compared to libusb... We do not tend to add version numbers in package names for other libraries and the rebuild is fairly minimal. Allan
Re: [arch-dev-public] migrate libusb1 to libusb and add libusb-compat to [core]
The rebuild is complete and moved to [testing]/[community-testing]. Note that some packages in the TODO list were excessive as the dependency update was handled further down the dependency chain. So do not be concerned if a package you though needed rebuilt is not there... unless of course it should really have been there, in which case file a bug! I'll leave the signoff email to Tobias P given he did the builds for [core]. Allan
[arch-dev-public] [signoff] lilo 23.1-2
from lilo 23.1-1 - upstream release - new url - updated source - use package() function - updated make options - rebuilt to switch to tar.xz lilo 23.1-2 - fixed source - added sharutils as new makedependence - added perl as optdependence to run keytab-lilo lilo 23.1-1 was without signoff, please signoff lilo 23.1-2 for both arches -- Andrea Scarpino Arch Linux Developer
[arch-dev-public] [signoff] nano 2.2.6-1
The 2.2.5-2 build with fixed deps didn't move to core. Maybe because an i686 signoff was missing. A new release is out. Please sign off now both arches. -Andy 2010.11.22 - GNU nano 2.2.6 Pimp my BBS wants you to go to www.desertbus.org and donate a few bucks for the great Child's Play Charity! This is just a small release to update a bug where restricted mode was not particularly restricted since key bindings were introduced. It also signals the return of win32 builds which now feature nanorc support; please see the FAQ for details of how to enable it, this feature is a bit of a kludge for now. Remember that when all else fails, USE SPACE JUMP.
Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] nano 2.2.6-1
On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 20:33 +0100, Andreas Radke wrote: The 2.2.5-2 build with fixed deps didn't move to core. Maybe because an i686 signoff was missing. A new release is out. Please sign off now both arches. -Andy 2010.11.22 - GNU nano 2.2.6 Pimp my BBS wants you to go to www.desertbus.org and donate a few bucks for the great Child's Play Charity! This is just a small release to update a bug where restricted mode was not particularly restricted since key bindings were introduced. It also signals the return of win32 builds which now feature nanorc support; please see the FAQ for details of how to enable it, this feature is a bit of a kludge for now. Remember that when all else fails, USE SPACE JUMP. Basic things work here. Signoff x86_64 -- Guillaume signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] usbutils-0.91-2
On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 14:24 +0100, Tobias Powalowski wrote: Hi guys, fixed depend to correct libusb1 please signoff both arches greetings tpowa I see the -3 (instead of -2 you are mentionning) in testing. So I can signoff x86_64 for this -3 ! -- Guillaume signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [arch-dev-public] [signoff] nano 2.2.6-1
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Guillaume ALAUX guilla...@archlinux.org wrote: On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 20:33 +0100, Andreas Radke wrote: The 2.2.5-2 build with fixed deps didn't move to core. Maybe because an i686 signoff was missing. A new release is out. Please sign off now both arches. -Andy 2010.11.22 - GNU nano 2.2.6 Pimp my BBS wants you to go to www.desertbus.org and donate a few bucks for the great Child's Play Charity! This is just a small release to update a bug where restricted mode was not particularly restricted since key bindings were introduced. It also signals the return of win32 builds which now feature nanorc support; please see the FAQ for details of how to enable it, this feature is a bit of a kludge for now. Remember that when all else fails, USE SPACE JUMP. Basic things work here. Signoff x86_64 -- Guillaume signoff i686
