Re: [arch-general] System Cron jobs not running
On Friday 21 Oct 2011 20:05:18 R7h0re4 wrote: Just to be safe I added the full path to my script for the commands it is calling. I also looked at the wiki again and nothing mentions the use of Cronie, and system cron jobs. I also checked the file /var/spool and see anacron which has the sub directories. I would almost say this wiki needs some updating and would assist once we get it working. I suggest removing cronie / anacron and switching to dcron. It used to be the default, but was switched because it was perceived to be buggy. However, all known bugs have now been fixed, and it's been running reliably for me for ages. I trust it more than cronie / anacron. Paul
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote: A user basically is using [testing] without fulfilling the above requirements. Should the user be advised not to use [testing] or is this counter-productive to the purpose of [testing]? It is very important that people use testing [0], so we should really encourage _more_ rather than less of that, IMHO. Rather than advice the user to stop using testing, I'd advice them to sign up to the mailinglist :-) Maybe this requirement should be communicated more clearly (e.g. a comment in the standard pacman.conf)? Cheers, Tom [0]: a lot of the non-trivial bugs against my packages are discovered after they move to core, probably because the people with the right hardware/use-cases are not using testing.
[arch-general] Proposal: Translate extension for the wiki
Hi. I'm trying to translate some articles into Turkish. While looking to the net, i've found a wiki extension named Translate extension. Advantages of this extension as well as the contact information of authors can be found here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Translate Features include: In-wiki localisation, proofreading and exporting of software interface messages (or just about anything) AJAX enabled web-based translation in supported browsers, as well as gettext based export and import for off-line translation. Structured content page translation using the same system as interface translation. Various aids to make the job of translators easier: Display of translations in globally defined other languages, optionally expanded with user defined languages Collaborative editing of documentation of the use and context of messages Translation memory and machine translation with external tools (tmserver, Google Translate, Apertium) Display of the latest change in the source message Warnings about common mistakes like parameters that are not used. Pre-made modules for various open source products you can use as an example. A versatile plug-in system to make it easy to add new projects as a message group. Various statistics (requires PHPlot for graphics) Translation completion percentages for all message groups in all supported languages Daily updates of completion percentages in all supported languages for any supported message group (if configured). Tool for making activity graphs for spans of time. Can display either number of edits or active users daily or hourly and includes many filters. A more detailed manual for the Translate extension is available at translatewiki.net. This extension can significantly ease up maintenance of the translations with no additional efforts to sync translations with original (automatic synchronization). Also it give us a chance to have separate wiki for each language without loosing untranslated information, besides it may eliminate English_Title (Language) weirdness. I think, exporting wiki pages to gnu gettext catalogs format should boosts translations may be using transifex or pootle with wider contributions. I can't find information about this extension in the forums if it have been discussed before. Also i'm just a humble contributor so i don't know if it can be implemented. What do you think about this?
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote: snip Maybe this requirement should be communicated more clearly (e.g. a comment in the standard pacman.conf)? Great idea. I mean, as a non-[testing] user I get that guinea pig feeling which comes naturally with linux often enough. Don't miss to express that [testing] here is far from what other distros label with testing and will hopefully break your system (because we want to know). snip [0]: a lot of the non-trivial bugs against my packages are discovered after they move to core, probably because the people with the right hardware/use-cases are not using testing. Looks really like I keep missing all the fun. What the hell, I'll add [testing] to my pacman.conf tonight... cheers! mar77i
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Martti Kühne mysat...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote: snip Maybe this requirement should be communicated more clearly (e.g. a comment in the standard pacman.conf)? Great idea. I mean, as a non-[testing] user I get that guinea pig feeling which comes naturally with linux often enough. Don't miss to express that [testing] here is far from what other distros label with testing and will hopefully break your system (because we want to know). Depends on who you compare to, unlike certain other distro's who shall not be named, we actually compile, install and test our packages before pushing to testing. We really don't want any packages in testing to break anyone's system as that will lead to fewer people using it. However, there will obviously be problems from time to time. Personally, I use testing on all my five machines (including for work), and never experienced a big problem (such as loss of data or a failed boot), but your mileage may vary ;-) Cheers, Tom
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
Am Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:24:26 +0200 schrieb Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote: A user basically is using [testing] without fulfilling the above requirements. Should the user be advised not to use [testing] or is this counter-productive to the purpose of [testing]? It is very important that people use testing [0], so we should really encourage _more_ rather than less of that, IMHO. Rather than advice the user to stop using testing, I'd advice them to sign up to the mailinglist :-) Maybe this requirement should be communicated more clearly (e.g. a comment in the standard pacman.conf)? Cheers, Tom [0]: a lot of the non-trivial bugs against my packages are discovered after they move to core, probably because the people with the right hardware/use-cases are not using testing. I agree with the Wiki. From the developer's point of view it's of course better to have more users using [testing]. But when I switched to Arch Linux some years ago I was used to using the testing tree from Gentoo because without testing you wouldn't get a lot of packages there. It's because a lot of packages have never been moved to the stable tree. But when I switched to Arch Linux and used the [testing] repo, too, I once had a serious issue, which has broken my system. As a result, I had to reinstall Arch Linux completely. Maybe the reinstall wouldn't have been necessary if I wasn't new to Arch Linux. After several years I can't tell you anymore what has happened exactly. But since then I know that Arch's [testing] repo is completely different from Gentoo's testing tree. On the other hand I never had any serious issues with packages from the stable repos. And if there was a new package which didn't run anymore it was only this single package. And until the bug is fixed I can still use the old version. So [testing] is definitely not for users who need a stable production system or for new Arch users. Those users should stay with the stable repos. That's what they are meant for. People should use [testing] only if they know what they are doing, if they don't rely on a stable system, and if they want or are asked to help testing the packages. [testing] is not meant for having a bleeding edge system. Packages usually only stay in [testing] for a few days. So people still have a bleeding edge system if they are using the stable repos. The same question regularly appears on AUR at packages which depend or are based on another package in the repos and a new version of this dependency is put to [testing]. So, please, don't encourage every user to using [testing], and stay with what the Wiki says. Heiko
[arch-general] Quiet Updates Lately
I've been doing 'pacman -Syu' for several days in a row lately to see no updates. Is bibleo.org still a good repo in the US? Is aArch all that quiet lately or am I missing something?
Re: [arch-general] Quiet Updates Lately
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Steve Holmes steve.holme...@gmail.com wrote: I've been doing 'pacman -Syu' for several days in a row lately to see no updates. Is bibleo.org still a good repo in the US? Is aArch all that quiet lately or am I missing something? there's an up-to-date list of mirrors on archlinux.org [1]. However I don't currently see bibleo.org on that list. [1] http://www.archlinux.org/mirrors/status/
Re: [arch-general] Quiet Updates Lately
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Steve Holmes steve.holme...@gmail.comwrote: I've been doing 'pacman -Syu' for several days in a row lately to see no updates. Is bibleo.org still a good repo in the US? Is aArch all that quiet lately or am I missing something? Your mirror does not even appear here: https://www.archlinux.org/mirrors/status/ I advise you to switch to another one. -- Cédric Girard
Re: [arch-general] Quiet Updates Lately
2011/10/24 Cédric Girard girard.ced...@gmail.com: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Steve Holmes steve.holme...@gmail.comwrote: I've been doing 'pacman -Syu' for several days in a row lately to see no updates. Is bibleo.org still a good repo in the US? Is aArch all that quiet lately or am I missing something? Your mirror does not even appear here: https://www.archlinux.org/mirrors/status/ I advise you to switch to another one. -- Cédric Girard I assume he meant ibiblieo, a giant internet archive/library.
Re: [arch-general] Quiet Updates Lately
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.comwrote: I assume he meant ibiblieo, a giant internet archive/library. There is a mirror there: http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/archlinux/ But it has not been updated for 10 days. -- Cédric Girard
Re: [arch-general] Quiet Updates Lately
bibleo.org doesn't appear in the current mirrorlist. assuming you mean ibiblieo, that last synced 10 days ago Could it be that your mirrorlist [1] is outdated? Perhaps check for /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist.pacnew [1] http://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/any/pacman-mirrorlist/ 2011/10/24 Steve Holmes steve.holme...@gmail.com: I've been doing 'pacman -Syu' for several days in a row lately to see no updates. Is bibleo.org still a good repo in the US? Is aArch all that quiet lately or am I missing something? -- msn: stefan_wilk...@hotmail.com e-mail: stefanwilk...@gmail.com blog: http://www.stefanwilkens.eu/ adres: Lipperkerkstraat 14 7511 DA Enschede
[arch-general] Wiki forum down?
Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is?
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On Monday 24 Oct 2011 10:30:26 Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? They both look fine to me. Maybe an issue with your local DNS? Paul
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 06:53, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Martti Kühne mysat...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote: snip Maybe this requirement should be communicated more clearly (e.g. a comment in the standard pacman.conf)? Great idea. I mean, as a non-[testing] user I get that guinea pig feeling which comes naturally with linux often enough. Don't miss to express that [testing] here is far from what other distros label with testing and will hopefully break your system (because we want to know). Depends on who you compare to, unlike certain other distro's who shall not be named, we actually compile, install and test our packages before pushing to testing. We really don't want any packages in testing to break anyone's system as that will lead to fewer people using it. However, there will obviously be problems from time to time. Personally, I use testing on all my five machines (including for work), and never experienced a big problem (such as loss of data or a failed boot), but your mileage may vary ;-) Cheers, Tom IMHO, one that doesn't count for much, I have to agree with Tom. I also have to agree with those making the point for watching the Arch Dev Public mailing list and reading the news announcements. I moved to Arch because it forces me to learn how to maintain my machines. It also allows me to compile my base and core packages to my machines architecture not a generic configuration. This is my system: Linux gandalf 3.0-pf #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Oct 24 00:05:45 CDT 2011 x86_64 AMD Phenom(tm) 8450 Triple-Core Processor AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux This is my makepkg configuration: CFLAGS=-march=amdfam10 -m64 -O2 -pipe -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 CXXFLAGS=-march=amdfam10 -m64 -O2 -pipe -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 This may not be an extreme, or even close to an edge case, but it might find something that a generic compile doesn't find. I've also discovered whether it boots or not, I can fix it. I will admit, as someone who has already responded on this thread can attest, I can ocassionally as a I really should have known that type of question. However, everyone screws up every once in a while, except me I'm perfect. The rest of this may be considered noise/off topic/thread high jacking but I'll try to make a point. Until I became disabled and had to retire in 2009 I was considered one of the best at what I did. I routinely trained people and wrote training manuals. It tooks years of having someone point out to me that I had the same response when training people that some experienced linux users have. If I had to tell someone more than once how to do it they got dressed down, after the third time I had no use for them. That was a hard lesson to learn. My son was an expert, definition of an expert -- a has been little drip, with Windows and worked as a support tech. He had the same opionion when training people, after the third how to do the same thing he had no use for them. The same son who was quick to point out how badly I treated people when trying to train them. I know answering the same questions over and over can be a pain and no one wants to invite help vampires but simply saying don't use testing just doesn't seem to be the right way to go. I've read the thread linked in the first email and I agree with the point made if, and I point out if and only if, it's done graciously. To many people, no names etc just generic people, jump in when the original poster doesn't get it and start slicing and dicing. Keep the commentary civil. Myra -- Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Paul Gideon Dann pdgid...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 24 Oct 2011 10:30:26 Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? They both look fine to me. Maybe an issue with your local DNS? Paul It is down for me to.
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
Le Mon, 24 Oct 2011 09:38:19 -0500, Dwight Schauer dscha...@gmail.com a écrit : On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Paul Gideon Dann pdgid...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 24 Oct 2011 10:30:26 Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? They both look fine to me. Maybe an issue with your local DNS? Paul It is down for me to. There is a thread on reddit about the issue: http://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/ln1ir/wiki_and_bbs_offline/
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On 24/10/11 16:38, Dwight Schauer wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Paul Gideon Dannpdgid...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 24 Oct 2011 10:30:26 Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? They both look fine to me. Maybe an issue with your local DNS? Paul It is down for me to. #archlinux's topic is: Hard disk failure on bbs and wiki For now: Use google Cache, way back machine? Else pacman -Ss arch wiki (it's from 15 october so it should be fine) -- Jelle van der Waa
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On Monday 24 Oct 2011 09:38:19 Dwight Schauer wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Paul Gideon Dann pdgid...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 24 Oct 2011 10:30:26 Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? They both look fine to me. Maybe an issue with your local DNS? Paul It is down for me to. That's odd; they're both down for me too, now. I do use dnsmasq for DNS caching, so maybe that has something to do with why it worked for me the first time? Paul
[arch-general] /usr is not mounted. This is not supported.
I've been using Arch Linux for about 4 years now. I have it on a few important systems at work and it has been doing very well. This morning I saw /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. in my boot up after a recent rc.sysinit update. What is this, bait and switch? I've been running Linux and BSD systems since 1996 and typically always have /usr in a separate partition (as well as /var, /home/ and /tmp, but lately been using a ram /tmp). Why does /usr even exist if it can't be on a separate partition? Why not just combine /usr/lib and /lib? And /usr/bin and /bin? And /usr/sbin and /sbin? Why have the distinction at all if it can't be on separate partition? I understand that historically that /usr often use to be on different drive, and that is not really an issue nowadays. Only this year have I started not putting /usr into separate partitions because I've been making thumbdrive installs, and did not really see any benefit to making so many partitions (automatically created anyways, with a custom install script). Does this /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. mean I'm going to have to eventually fix (dump/fix/restore) all my systems that are now currently running fine (and that I and others are depending on at my work) because Arch Linux no longer supports /usr on a different partition (due to rc.sysinit failing, not just printing an error message)? I run Arch Linux on more than 10 systems, and about 6 or 7 of those are at work (where Arch has been working out very well). I'm not looking forward to redoing all these systems that are running fine if this is where Arch is headed and rc.sysinit is not fixed to take out this new requirement. I know this a bit of a rant, but this /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. error message is definitely not getting this day off to a good start... Definitely not wanting to give up Arch for such a simple issue Dwight
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
Paul Gideon Dann, Mon 2011-10-24 @ 15:35:58+0100: They both look fine to me. Maybe an issue with your local DNS? Strange, I've tried it from multiple hosts, including remote hosts in other cities/on other ISPs, all with the same result, no response from the server. I haven't seen a problem with any other websites this morning, including other subdomains of archlinux.org. Mind telling me what address wiki.archlinux.org resolves to for you? My DNS is showing it as a CNAME for brynhild.archlinux.org, which is at 176.9.18.112.
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:30:26AM -0400, Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? There has been a harddriver failure, wichhas led to wiki and bss do go ofline. I myself don't have any information on when and how this issue will be resolved. In mean while join #archlinux in irc.freenode.net Feel free to use your favourite IRC app.
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
Jelle van der Waa, Mon 2011-10-24 @ 16:41:53+0200: For now: Use google Cache, way back machine? Else pacman -Ss arch wiki (it's from 15 october so it should be fine) Thanks, I didn't know the wiki was available as a downloadable package. That will suffice for now.
Re: [arch-general] /usr is not mounted. This is not supported.
This is not a new thing, it has been broken for quite a while. http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken Sander On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Dwight Schauer dscha...@gmail.com wrote: I've been using Arch Linux for about 4 years now. I have it on a few important systems at work and it has been doing very well. This morning I saw /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. in my boot up after a recent rc.sysinit update. What is this, bait and switch? I've been running Linux and BSD systems since 1996 and typically always have /usr in a separate partition (as well as /var, /home/ and /tmp, but lately been using a ram /tmp). Why does /usr even exist if it can't be on a separate partition? Why not just combine /usr/lib and /lib? And /usr/bin and /bin? And /usr/sbin and /sbin? Why have the distinction at all if it can't be on separate partition? I understand that historically that /usr often use to be on different drive, and that is not really an issue nowadays. Only this year have I started not putting /usr into separate partitions because I've been making thumbdrive installs, and did not really see any benefit to making so many partitions (automatically created anyways, with a custom install script). Does this /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. mean I'm going to have to eventually fix (dump/fix/restore) all my systems that are now currently running fine (and that I and others are depending on at my work) because Arch Linux no longer supports /usr on a different partition (due to rc.sysinit failing, not just printing an error message)? I run Arch Linux on more than 10 systems, and about 6 or 7 of those are at work (where Arch has been working out very well). I'm not looking forward to redoing all these systems that are running fine if this is where Arch is headed and rc.sysinit is not fixed to take out this new requirement. I know this a bit of a rant, but this /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. error message is definitely not getting this day off to a good start... Definitely not wanting to give up Arch for such a simple issue Dwight
Re: [arch-general] /usr is not mounted. This is not supported.
On 2011-10-24 17:42, Dwight Schauer wrote: This morning I saw /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. in my boot up after a recent rc.sysinit update. What is this, bait and switch? I've been running Linux and BSD systems since 1996 and typically always have /usr in a separate partition (as well as /var, /home/ and /tmp, but lately been using a ram /tmp). See http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken for an explanation on why booting without a separate /usr does not really work, as well as this thread http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.systemd.devel/1337. Note I said booting. If /usr is mounted by your initramfs, it's perfectly fine. Why does /usr even exist if it can't be on a separate partition? Why not just combine /usr/lib and /lib? And /usr/bin and /bin? And /usr/sbin and /sbin? Why have the distinction at all if it can't be on separate partition? I remember reading a few mailing list posts about this, but can't find them right now. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.systemd.devel/3480 appears to be relevant -- it's easier to snapshot a single /usr than /bin+/lib+/sbin+...: | The point is not to have 6-10 top-level dirs for the system to manage, | but only a single one. We need a single point to snapshot or share. -- Mantas M.
Re: [arch-general] /usr is not mounted. This is not supported.
Am 24.10.2011 16:42, schrieb Dwight Schauer: I've been using Arch Linux for about 4 years now. I have it on a few important systems at work and it has been doing very well. This morning I saw /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. in my boot up after a recent rc.sysinit update. Basically, we will not fix any bugs in the future that are the result of a separate /usr, we will instantly close them instead. The link Sander posted gives a few examples. If everything works fine for you, then nothing changes for you. Does this /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. mean I'm going to have to eventually fix (dump/fix/restore) all my systems No. Even if things fail entirely, we will provide a hook for mkinitcpio that mounts /usr before switching to the real root filesystem. This will eliminate all your potential bugs. However - this hook hasn't been written yet. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On 10/24/2011 05:30 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? the services had come back online in the same time you reported this issue. your internet is working fine, don't worry. we had a hard disk failure which needs to be replaced. the server is going down again at 19:00 CEST for another 15 minutes. -- Ionuț
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote: On 10/24/2011 05:30 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? the services had come back online in the same time you reported this issue. your internet is working fine, don't worry. we had a hard disk failure which needs to be replaced. the server is going down again at 19:00 CEST for another 15 minutes. -- Ionuț While we're at it, what it the preferred way to contact our Dear Arch Overlords if something is malfunctioning? Pierre said try to contact us immediately https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1001244#p1001244 but didn't say how ...
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On 10/24/2011 06:37 PM, Karol Blazewicz wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Ionut Biruib...@archlinux.org wrote: On 10/24/2011 05:30 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: Apologies if I've missed something obvious, but both the wiki and forum seem to have been down for at least a few hours now (I think they are located on the same host). Does anyone know what the situation is? the services had come back online in the same time you reported this issue. your internet is working fine, don't worry. we had a hard disk failure which needs to be replaced. the server is going down again at 19:00 CEST for another 15 minutes. -- Ionuț While we're at it, what it the preferred way to contact our Dear Arch Overlords if something is malfunctioning? Pierre said try to contact us immediately https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1001244#p1001244 but didn't say how ... contact me, florian or pierre, directly on our emails -- Ionuț
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On (10/24/11 09:37), Myra Nelson wrote:
-~ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 06:53, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
-~ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Martti Kühne mysat...@gmail.com wrote:
-~ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
-~ snip
-~ Maybe this requirement should be communicated more clearly (e.g. a
-~ comment in the standard pacman.conf)?
-~
-~ snip
-~ doesn't get it and start slicing and dicing. Keep the commentary
-~ civil.
-~
-~ Myra
-~
-~
-~ --
-~ Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!
It is simple: if you don't use testing you never learn. Telling others RTFM
and don't ask questions is ridiculous, because following this logic 50% of
forum posts is just noise. And just because you subscribe to ML doesn't mean
that you'll remember 1 relevant message out of 100 (personally I learned more
from http://allanmcrae.com/2011/08/pacman-package-signing-3-pacman/ about
pacman package signing than from all of [{arch,pacman}-dev*]. This is of course
not to say that ML are not important, beacuse they are.
Besides, one really doesn't have to enable testing in pacman.conf -- individual
pacman -U will do, imho.
Regarding your compile flags, I would use -match=native (instead of your
-march and -m) and -fstack-protector-all (instead of -fstack-protector) if you
don't mind increasing the size of binaries a little.
--
Leonid Isaev
GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D
Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
pgpk9LhVQhbKz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Ionut Biru ib...@archlinux.org wrote: On 10/24/2011 06:37 PM, Karol Blazewicz wrote: While we're at it, what it the preferred way to contact our Dear Arch Overlords if something is malfunctioning? Pierre said try to contact us immediately https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1001244#p1001244 but didn't say how ... contact me, florian or pierre, directly on our emails -- Ionuț Just to be sure: it's OK to e-mail all 3 of you after 15 minutes of downtime / forum search malfunction etc. or should I wait more / act sooner?
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Leonid Isaev lis...@umail.iu.edu wrote: Besides, one really doesn't have to enable testing in pacman.conf -- individual pacman -U will do, imho. I've read that [testing] is all or nothing and you shouldn't cherrypick packages because you might break something. Somewhat relevant https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=127144
Re: [arch-general] Wiki forum down?
On 10/24/2011 06:58 PM, Karol Blazewicz wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Ionut Biruib...@archlinux.org wrote: On 10/24/2011 06:37 PM, Karol Blazewicz wrote: While we're at it, what it the preferred way to contact our Dear Arch Overlords if something is malfunctioning? Pierre said try to contact us immediately https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1001244#p1001244 but didn't say how ... contact me, florian or pierre, directly on our emails -- Ionuț Just to be sure: it's OK to e-mail all 3 of you after 15 minutes of downtime / forum search malfunction etc. or should I wait more / act sooner? it's fine -- Ionuț
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On (10/24/11 18:00), Karol Blazewicz wrote: -~ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Leonid Isaev lis...@umail.iu.edu wrote: -~ Besides, one really doesn't have to enable testing in pacman.conf -- individual -~ pacman -U will do, imho. -~ -~ I've read that [testing] is all or nothing and you shouldn't -~ cherrypick packages because you might break something. -~ Somewhat relevant https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=127144 That's where brain comes in handy :) -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D pgpZzS6qTSz7A.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] /usr is not mounted. This is not supported.
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Dwight Schauer dscha...@gmail.com wrote: I've been using Arch Linux for about 4 years now. I have it on a few important systems at work and it has been doing very well. This morning I saw /usr is not mounted. This is not supported. in my boot up after a recent rc.sysinit update. What is this, bait and switch? I've been running Linux and BSD systems since 1996 and typically always have /usr in a separate partition (as well as /var, /home/ and /tmp, but lately been using a ram /tmp). Why does /usr even exist if it can't be on a separate partition? Why not just combine /usr/lib and /lib? And /usr/bin and /bin? And /usr/sbin and /sbin? Why have the distinction at all if it can't be on separate partition? Several people already pointed out the relevant information about this, but I thought I should offer my two cents as I was responsible for the error message. The situation is currently that lots of tools break silently if /usr is not mounted at boot. In most cases you will not notice, and in the cases you do notice it is really difficult to tell what is actually going on. From time to time we get bug reports that are really difficult to debug, and that eventually turn out to be due to a separate /usr. Once we figure out the cause, we usually end up having to say, sorry, there is nothing we can do about that, but in the meantime we have wasted a lot of time. Therefore, we really want to get the message out there that at the moment things simply don't work as they should with a separate /usr. Then people will at least know that this is a likely cause of any weird problems they experience. There are two ways to solve this: either merge your / and your /usr partitions, or make your initramfs mount /usr so init won't even know that /usr is separate. We are currently working on adding support for the second approach, but we are not there yet (I have some patches against mkinitcpio to add this, but they rely on a patch by Thomas against busybox that has not yet landed upstream). Cheers, Tom
Re: [arch-general] /usr is not mounted. This is not supported.
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote: There are two ways to solve this: either merge your / and your /usr partitions, or make your initramfs mount /usr so init won't even know that /usr is separate. We are currently working on adding support for the second approach, but we are not there yet (I have some patches against mkinitcpio to add this, but they rely on a patch by Thomas against busybox that has not yet landed upstream). Ok, so it is not as much of a problem as I initially thought it would be. On new large media installs I'll try to not use /usr until this gets resolved. On current installs they all seem to be working fine (I've not noticed any lack of functionality) I'll just wait until the mkinitcpio patches are completed and mkinitcpio is released with /usr mount support. Thanks, Dwight Schauer
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Leonid Isaev lis...@umail.iu.edu wrote: On (10/24/11 18:00), Karol Blazewicz wrote: -~ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Leonid Isaev lis...@umail.iu.edu wrote: -~ Besides, one really doesn't have to enable testing in pacman.conf -- individual -~ pacman -U will do, imho. -~ -~ I've read that [testing] is all or nothing and you shouldn't -~ cherrypick packages because you might break something. -~ Somewhat relevant https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=127144 That's where brain comes in handy :) Yes, its a REALLY good idea to state that its okay to pacman -U individual [testing] packages on a public mailing list with at least some users who really don't know any better than to do just that.
[arch-general] Forums down
Greetings Just to communicate that the archlinux forum pages are all down for the time being, I guess you already know that but just wanting to make sure in case you didn't.
Re: [arch-general] Forums down
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Erwin José Lopez Pulgarin erwinke...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings Just to communicate that the archlinux forum pages are all down for the time being, I guess you already know that but just wanting to make sure in case you didn't. Yup, forums are down. I've e-mailed Ioni, florian or pierre as per http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2011-October/022390.html over an hour ago.
Re: [arch-general] Discussion on usage of [testing] repo - minimal requirements?
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 19:38, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Leonid Isaev lis...@umail.iu.edu wrote: On (10/24/11 18:00), Karol Blazewicz wrote: -~ On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Leonid Isaev lis...@umail.iu.edu wrote: -~ Besides, one really doesn't have to enable testing in pacman.conf -- individual -~ pacman -U will do, imho. -~ -~ I've read that [testing] is all or nothing and you shouldn't -~ cherrypick packages because you might break something. -~ Somewhat relevant https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=127144 That's where brain comes in handy :) Yes, its a REALLY good idea to state that its okay to pacman -U individual [testing] packages on a public mailing list with at least some users who really don't know any better than to do just that. This is the reason these discussions become useless, there are some opinions that will never change. All the warnings are in place and as I agreed with earlier point that out to graciously if need be. But you never learn anything if you take the safest route all the time. Learning is about experimentation. Without experimentation a person becomes stagnant. You can't tell someone you can't do that, or at least don't tell me that or I'll bust my ass and break my neck trying to do what I've been told not to do. I'm not sure but it may be that being born in the USA, working in the oil field for 30+ years where the main incentive was the line can't get it can't stay, or maybe because I live in Texas and am one of those obstinate know it all Texans. Better put was a joke years ago by the comedian Red Skelton. It used to reside on a bill board along I10 in South Texas. When asked how you can tell a Texan, his reply was Yep you can tell a Texan but you can't tell him much. The attitude about not telling some users who really don't know any better than to do just that grates on my nerves. It might be a better idea to put a better explanation on the wiki about what exactly might happen to those who chose to use testing. Of course I'm one of those who build there own packages from testing and trunk, keeps their own repo for base and core, and uses pacman -U to install my packages. I wouldn't have learned how to do that without making some mistakes, doing a lot of reading, and asking a few I really should have known that type questions. I wouldn't have learn how to fix my box when it's broken. I've now broken my own rule and made this personal on a list where that shouldn't be done. I apologize to all those whom I didn't mean to offend and did and for the excess noise on the list. Myra Nelson -- Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!
