Hello,
In the process of updating the 'Use gpg signatures and https sources'
TODO list, packages which weren't using https in their 'url' field were
also added. This changes were reversed and a new TODO list was opened.
Sorry for the trouble.
Thanks,
Filipe Laíns
3DCE 51D6 0930 EBA4 7858 BA41
Hello,
Currently there are no guidelines stating which x86 extensions (ex.
SSE2, SEE3, SSE4, AVX, etc.) we support. This is a bit problematic
since it lets compilers do what they want and possible generate code
that can't run on some systems.
Even though this is an issue, it's not complete
On Sat, 2019-05-25 at 10:35 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 25/5/19 10:17 am, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Currently there are no guidelines stating which x86 extensions (ex.
> > SSE2, SEE3, SSE4, AVX, etc.) we support. This is a bit pr
On Sat, 2019-05-25 at 13:19 +0200, Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le 25/05/2019 à 02:17, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public a écrit :
> > I would also like to explore the idea of adding an "high performance"
> > architecture which would be able to
On Sat, 2019-05-25 at 21:27 +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 25/5/19 9:19 pm, Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le 25/05/2019 à 02:17, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public a écrit :
> > > I would also like to explore the idea
Hi,
I will be away this week. I understand some of you have questions specifically
about the new discord packages. Feel free to take any action that you feel
necessary, delete, modify, etc..., just document that (email, irc or etc).
Thabk you,
Filipe Laíns
3DCE 51D6 0930 EBA4 7858 BA41 46F6
On Thu, 2019-12-12 at 13:21 +0100, Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> Due to a longer discussion around alpha and beta packages in our
> repositories in IRC yesterday, I would like to start a hopefully more
> constructive discussion around this topic on the ML.
On Mon, 2020-01-06 at 15:41 +0100, Morten Linderud via arch-events wrote:
> Yo!
>
> Last year at FOSDEM we held a dinner with 15 people, some members from the
> Arch
> team and some users that wanted to join. It was a great event and people had a
> nice dinner with some nice chats afterwards on
On Sun, 2020-04-19 at 20:50 +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm going to disown some packages as I no longer actively use them and I
> want to shift focus into my on other Arch roles:
>
> ettercap
> openttd-opensfx
> openttd-opengfx
> rdesktop
> tesseract
> tesseract-*
> tidy
>
On Sun, 2020-03-29 at 23:37 +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 29/3/20 11:17 pm, Filipe Laíns wrote:
> > I would also like to note that rebuilding everything with forced
> > support for AVX2 or whatever won't have much effect. Most packages do
> > not have workloads where it would
On Sun, 2020-03-29 at 15:39 +0100, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> I make the PKGBUILD build for 2
* I can make
Sorry, I am a little distracted today.
Filipe Laíns
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
I want to clarify what I am proposing.
I would not be an entirely new architecture in the sense of i686, CPU
extensions are not different architectures and shouldn't be treated as
such.
What I would for us to do is to create a x86-64-axv2, etc. that would
complement x86-64. We would not add it
On Sun, 2020-03-29 at 16:25 +0100, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I would not be an entirely
*It would
> What I would for us to do is to create a x86-64-axv2, etc. that would
*would like for us
> let's me to believe (but this may be just me), I would be
*let m
On Mon, 2020-03-30 at 09:07 +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
> SSE4.2 is 2008 for Intel, 2011 for AMD. Though I guess some processors
> were released without it for some time after that. AVX was released by
> both in 2011.
>
> So why is one too far and the other not?
I was
On Sun, 2020-03-29 at 20:26 +1000, Allan McRae via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Remember when Arch Linux was optimized out of the box. We have the
> blazingly fast i686 port while other distros hung out in i386 land.
> Those were the days where the idea of Arch being fast started. Now it
> has
On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 07:16 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase via arch-dev-
public wrote:
> libusb-compat
I can maintain this, please drop to [community] :)
Filipe Laíns
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hi all,
I want to bring up two issues relating Kyle Keen's packages. I tried to
contact him and got an initial reply but I have not heard from him
since. It has been almost 4 months and I have sent him 3 different
followup emails. Since it was not super urgent I let a pretty
significant amount of
On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 22:43 -1000, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> [2020-06-04 23:03:23 +0100] Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public:
> > 1) Rename libuhd to uhd
> > 2) Use the gr- prefix instead of gnuradio- for GNURadio[2] blocks
>
> Your proposed changes indeed s
On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:19 -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 6/5/20 9:04 AM, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > My main concern here is that it is not as simple as it just being
> > Kyle's decision, it sets a precedent. I believe the naming i
On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 14:43 -1000, Gaetan Bisson via arch-dev-public wrote:
> [2020-07-27 21:10:23 -0300] Giancarlo Razzolini:
> > Em julho 27, 2020 21:03 Gaetan Bisson escreveu:
> > > It's quite unsettling that we seem to be rushing to write a news post
> > > while this very reasonable suggestion
On Thu, 2020-11-26 at 21:21 +0100, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> On 21/11/2020 15:34, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I want to propose adding all active Python versions to [community], not
> > just the latest one. This would only entail adding
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 16:58 +0100, Andreas Radke via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> Am Sat, 21 Nov 2020 14:34:24 +
> schrieb Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public
> :
>
>
> > Does anyone have any big issue with this? What are your thoughts?
> >
> > [1] https://www.pyth
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 20:09 +0100, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
pymol
python-biopython
Adopted.
Filipe Laíns
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 11:24 -0600, Doug Newgard via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 16:59:21 +
> Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 16:58 +0100, Andreas Radke via arch-dev-
> > public
> > wrote:
> >
Hi all,
I want to propose adding all active Python versions to [community], not
just the latest one. This would only entail adding the interpreter
itself, no other packages.
Having access to interpreters for older active versions is really
helpful for Python developers. This allows them to
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 16:59 +0100, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 04:47:27PM +0100, David Runge wrote:
> > On 2020-11-21 14:34:24 (+), Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public
> > wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > >
Whoops, my email client messed up the formatting :/
Here's the reply without the quotes:
Looking at some package stats for pyenv[1], we see a usage of 3,4%. I
think that is a big enough number.
pyenv does have another usage, which is managing custom Python
interpreters, which is mainly used in
On Sun, 2020-11-22 at 09:13 -0600, Doug Newgard via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Why did you start the discussion if you plan on ignoring other people's
> opinions anyway?
>
> Doug
I am not ignoring Andreas' or Eli's opinion, I understand that they don't want
these packages in the repos. What I am
On Sun, 2020-11-22 at 09:43 -0600, Doug Newgard via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 15:32:22 +
> Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2020-11-22 at 09:13 -0600, Doug Newgard via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > > Why did you start th
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 20:24 -0500, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Your analysis is correct, it is indeed hell. I'm not sure why that is an
> argument in favor of doing even more of it though.
>
> Now, if you were proposing to get rid of some of this, I could get
> behind that.
It was
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 07:51 -0700, Zach Himsel wrote:
> What would determine what the "default" python be? The latest?
>
>
> --
> Zach Himsel
> mailto://z...@himsel.net
> http://zach.himsel.net
Yep, that would stay exactly as it is right now. We would only
additionally provide interpreters (and
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 19:11 +0100, Bartłomiej Piotrowski via arch-dev-public
wrote:
On 21/11/2020 18.48, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I understand that. I am not asking to put all releases of Python on
> the
> repos, only the active ones, which people are using.
I presum
On Sun, 2020-11-22 at 11:45 -0500, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 11/22/20 10:05 AM, Filipe Laíns wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 20:24 -0500, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > > Your analysis is correct, it is indeed hell. I'm not sure why that is an
> > > argument in
33 matches
Mail list logo
