Re: [arch-general] AUR IProblem
>12 ex9k1.dc7.fsn1.hetzner.com (213.239.229.238) 46.214 ms >ex9k1.dc7.fsn1.hetzner.com (213.239.229.234) 46.021 ms 46.034 ms > >13 * * * Seems like luna.archlinux.org is dropping traffic from your IP. It may or may not be temporary (arch infrastructure uses fail2ban). I would suggest pinging a dev with a devops role https://www.archlinux.org/people/developers/. Josef Miegl signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] AUR IProblem
On January 4, 2020 3:46:30 AM GMT+01:00, heis snow via arch-general wrote: >Hello, im having an issue with aur.archlinux.org, i cant access, i cant >even ping (time out) with the router. AFAIK arch.archlinux.org is hosted on a Hetzner VPS. This could be a routing/peering problem on Hetzners end or a routing/peering problem on your ISPs end. What does 'traceroute aur.archlinux.org' say? Josef Miegl signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[arch-general] AUR IProblem
Hello, im having an issue with aur.archlinux.org, i cant access, i cant even ping (time out) with the router. I called my ISP and theres nothing they can do, users in the IRC channel #archlinux told me that sounds like an issue on arch's end, i dont know who to report this or what to do thanks
[arch-general] community/espeak-ng
Does this package need some systemd additions like service files? If not, how can espeak-ng be configured so it starts up whenever a computer is booted? It's got no page in the archwiki and if I can get a replacement of espeak done speech-dispatcher will work with it and if speech-dispatcher works then I can get gnome and orca running too. --
Re: [arch-general] Adding a "posix" metapackage
On 1/3/20 10:49 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > Hi Santiago, > >> I'm curious, though, are there any specifics about the providers on >> these POSIX tools/libraries/whatnot (i.e., would it be wortwhile >> discussing the alternatives?). > > Is sh being provided by bash(1)? A more POSIX-compliant shell may be > better, one that doesn't let lots of bashisms pass without complaint. > dash(1)? And dash doesn't have time as a built-in, so we get to pull in > an executable for that too. Currently, sh is provided exclusively by bash, though ksh, zsh, mksh and busybox also provide a "time" builtin. I guess it would be reasonable to uncomment it. > As for SCCS, it's a handy file format. Better in design that RCS's. > And used by other tools over the years, e.g. Bitkeeper, so they do > linger on. Plus it's a historical file format, just as ncompress was > sought to be more POSIX compliant. But ncompress is simple to package and generally useful -- it can even be used by makepkg for extremely fast compression (albeit not as compressible as gzip or other recent formats). SCCS would require me to actually package it! So I need to decide if I'm interested in the effort that would take, for an XSI option. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] Adding a "posix" metapackage
Hi Santiago, > I'm curious, though, are there any specifics about the providers on > these POSIX tools/libraries/whatnot (i.e., would it be wortwhile > discussing the alternatives?). Is sh being provided by bash(1)? A more POSIX-compliant shell may be better, one that doesn't let lots of bashisms pass without complaint. dash(1)? And dash doesn't have time as a built-in, so we get to pull in an executable for that too. As for SCCS, it's a handy file format. Better in design that RCS's. And used by other tools over the years, e.g. Bitkeeper, so they do linger on. Plus it's a historical file format, just as ncompress was sought to be more POSIX compliant. -- Cheers, Ralph.
