Re: Upcoming PHP 8.2 update and introduction of legacy packages

The rebuild for modules and anything that links against PHP went quite well and I have moved the packages into [testing]. Even uwsgi did build with a simple patch. I did notice that this project is in maintenance mode according to upstream; so I am not that optimistic we can provide the PHP plugin

Re: Upcoming PHP 8.2 update and introduction of legacy packages

On 2022-12-20 10:00:09 (+0100), Pierre Schmitz wrote: > The rebuild for modules and anything that links against PHP went quite > well and I have moved the packages into [testing]. Even uwsgi did > build with a simple patch. I did notice that this project is in > maintenance mode according to upstre

Re: RFC - thoughts about Arch and init freedom?

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 01:52:02AM +, Connor Behan wrote: > > 1. Put openrc in [community] which I have used on my laptop for two years > without issue. > 2. Make it depend on systemd (so it is clear we are not packaging eudev) > and make installation print a warning that users of netctl and de

Re: Upcoming PHP 8.2 update and introduction of legacy packages

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 10:12 AM David Runge wrote: > Please rebuild nextcloud packages and see if they work before moving php > to outside of staging. This is what I introduced the php-interpreter > virtual provides for! :) > > Package builds should fail right away in check() if it is not > compa

Re: Upcoming PHP 8.2 update and introduction of legacy packages

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 10:44 AM Pierre Schmitz wrote: >(I can do the required changes if you like) As some code is probably easier to talk about here is my idea in patch from: https://gist.github.com/pierres/227602544b54a1b027471b6ccdab36c1 -- Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com

Re: Upcoming PHP 8.2 update and introduction of legacy packages

On 2022-12-20 11:09:15 (+0100), Pierre Schmitz wrote: > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 10:44 AM Pierre Schmitz wrote: > >(I can do the required changes if you like) > > As some code is probably easier to talk about here is my idea in patch > from: https://gist.github.com/pierres/227602544b54a1b027471b6c

Re: RFC - thoughts about Arch and init freedom?

Hey, On 20/12/2022 02:52, Connor Behan wrote: On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 8:01 AM Christian Hesse > wrote: Andreas Radke mailto:andy...@archlinux.org>> on Fri, 2022/12/16 22:46: > The older Arch developers may remember vaguely how Arch has introduced > [1

Re: Upcoming PHP 8.2 update and introduction of legacy packages

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:25 AM David Runge wrote: > Hm, I'm not so happy about this removing the checks and hardcoding > php-legacy though. The check is done by calling versioncheck.php directly as it fails when version constraints are not met. You are correct, if we want users to be able to u

Re: RFC - thoughts about Arch and init freedom?

On 2022-12-16 22:46:12 (+0100), Andreas Radke wrote: > Nowadays systemd has become much more than a plain init system > and plans to grow further. This may leadd to problems from a user and > system administrator perspective once you are hit by some bug. Systemd > as a whole thing doesn't care abou

Re: RFC - thoughts about Arch and init freedom?

Some have asked about technical layout variants: What would you expect from freedom of init choice? A half way means to offer at least one 2nd choice for pid1 and a 2nd init system and keep systemd for the other tasks it tries to serve. This would still not offer a true choice for the additional s

Re: RFC - thoughts about Arch and init freedom?

On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 14:05:34 +0100 David Runge said: > On 2022-12-16 22:46:12 (+0100), Andreas Radke wrote: > > Nowadays systemd has become much more than a plain init system > > and plans to grow further. This may leadd to problems from a user and > > system administrator perspective once you ar