On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Meyithi wrote:
>> It appears that the quiet kernel parameter also sets a quiet flag in
>> Syslinux as well, which is doing something horrible to early framebuffers.
>> As to the original question, it seems
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:43 AM, Madhurya Kakati wrote:
> Hi,
> I ran pacman -Syu and now I am seeing more info than shown before
> during boot. VERBOSE is set to 3 in rc.conf. Whats happening? Any
> changes to boot process?
> Thanks
>
When you upgraded you got
[code]
[2011-07-31 18:35] warning: /
Hi,
I ran pacman -Syu and now I am seeing more info than shown before
during boot. VERBOSE is set to 3 in rc.conf. Whats happening? Any
changes to boot process?
Thanks
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 12:24 AM, R7h0re4 wrote:
> I have a canon MP280 printer and am unable to print using turboprint, as
> well as a regular cups using gutenprint drivers or Turboprint drivers or
> the .ppd files downloaded from Canon's site.
>
> When I check the aur most of the packaged drivers
Am Fri, 05 Aug 2011 14:54:07 +0200
schrieb Thomas Bächler :
> 3) As it is now, new installations will end up with compat symlinks.
> This is only supposed to be for updates, not for new installations.
Wouldn't it be better to put it to post_upgrade instead of post_install?
Heiko
I have a canon MP280 printer and am unable to print using turboprint, as
well as a regular cups using gutenprint drivers or Turboprint drivers or
the .ppd files downloaded from Canon's site.
When I check the aur most of the packaged drivers are outdated and when
I check the bug reports it seems th
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:04 PM, XeCycle wrote:
> There seems to be something wrong about the Emacs version number.
>
>> -
>> $ LC_ALL=C sudo pacman -Syu --ignore octave
>> :: Synchronizing package databases...
>> core is up to date
>> extra is up to date
On 08/05/2011 09:04 PM, XeCycle wrote:
There seems to be something wrong about the Emacs version number.
-
$ LC_ALL=C sudo pacman -Syu --ignore octave
:: Synchronizing package databases...
core is up to date
extra is up to date
community is up to
There seems to be something wrong about the Emacs version number.
> -
> $ LC_ALL=C sudo pacman -Syu --ignore octave
> :: Synchronizing package databases...
> core is up to date
> extra is up to date
> community is up to date
> catalyst is up to date
> :
I just noticed that after updating the firefox plugin https-everywhere
to version 1.0, Arch Linux is supported by default.
We already redirect the bbs, wiki and bugs site to https by default.
With https-everywhere, firefox will also use the https versions of aur,
www, projects and all other *.arch
If I may: I think if they (devs) work with that particular program,
they should know better if a -O3 optimization is more adequate or not
then a -O2 or whatever, more then the packager -- that is not so
deeply involved with the project anyway.
On 5 August 2011 16:54, Jan de Groot wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 15:23 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
>
>> For eg. some developers like to enforce -O3, so they should first get
>> the system CFLAGS and override it's -O*, if any.
>>
>> But in general, I agree. We shouldn't enforce anything either unle
2011/8/3 Paul Gideon Dann
> On Wednesday 03 Aug 2011 22:25:37 Leon Feng wrote:
> > 2011/8/3 Paul Gideon Dann
> >
> > > Are you getting a crash report from KDE? Also, have you checked for
> > > relevant
> > > information in the xorg-server log?
> >
> > No everything is ok in xorg-server. After k
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:54:41AM +0200, Jan de Groot wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 15:23 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
>
> > For eg. some developers like to enforce -O3, so they should first get
> > the system CFLAGS and override it's -O*, if any.
> >
> > But in general, I agree. We shouldn't enfor
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 03:23:44PM +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
> On 5 August 2011 07:35, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> > My own opinion is that we shouldn't patch anything here. While using the
> > same optimization flags for all packages might result in some kind of
> > consistency, one of our main guide
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 03:02:17PM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 05/08/11 09:35, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> >In the course of a discussion with the xwax [1] developer, I was asked
> >the question why we would override CFLAGS (optimization levels, in
> >particular) if upstream already provides them.
On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 15:23 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
> For eg. some developers like to enforce -O3, so they should first get
> the system CFLAGS and override it's -O*, if any.
>
> But in general, I agree. We shouldn't enforce anything either unless
> we're trying to fix something. The ardour PKGB
On 5 August 2011 07:35, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> My own opinion is that we shouldn't patch anything here. While using the
> same optimization flags for all packages might result in some kind of
> consistency, one of our main guidelines - not to do any unnecessary
> modifications - is kind of viola
18 matches
Mail list logo
