On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:14 AM, Mick wrote:
> I did make a mistake when I chose Arch. I asked friends on yahoo chat
> for suggestions for a replacement my then distro when it focused on
> eye-candy to the detriment of function and several suggested Arch. It
> was only when the problems I raised
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> > Interesting... can someone clarify what's going on with this? I was under
> > the
> > impression that under the new versioning scheme some versions would only
> > have
> > two numbers now, e.g. 3.0. Is this not the case any more and we will always
>
Auguste Pop wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 4:24 PM, clemens fischer <...> wrote:
>
>> Yesterday I compiled the new 3.0.8 stable kernel, and the script also
>> invoked mkinitcpio(8), which eventually puts the new udev-174 into
>> the initramfs image. Thereafter the udev in the image and on the
>
On (10/28/11 12:24), Mick wrote:
-~> On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:24:13 -0500
-~> Leonid Isaev wrote:
-~>
-~> > On (10/27/11 17:49), Mick wrote:
-~> > -~> Following yet another update that has disabled user control of USB
-~> > -~> sticks, cameras, etc. and blocked user from shutting down from the
-~>
On 2011-10-27 8:24 PM, Mick wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:24:13 -0500
> Leonid Isaev wrote:
>
>> On (10/27/11 17:49), Mick wrote:
>> -~> Following yet another update that has disabled user control of USB
>> -~> sticks, cameras, etc. and blocked user from shutting down from the
>> -~> desktop (in
On 2011-10-27 11:14 PM, Mick wrote:
> My primary desire for updates is for:
> 1.) security fixes
> 2.) bug fixes
>
> I don't need to update for new features unless its a feature I need,
> in which case I am happy to chase it myself and expect problems.
>
> The fact that these particular issues keep
Am 28.10.2011 18:39, schrieb Peter Lewis:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
> Archlinux Changes:
> - $(uname -r) reports now the full kernel version
>
> Interesting... can someone clarify what's going on with this? I was under the
> impression that under the new versioning sc
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Peter Lewis wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
>> >>> Archlinux Changes:
>> >>> - $(uname -r) reports now the full kernel version
>
> (I've just been fixing some software to cope with the case when uname doesn't
> return a third number... perhap
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
> >>> Archlinux Changes:
> >>> - $(uname -r) reports now the full kernel version
Interesting... can someone clarify what's going on with this? I was under the
impression that under the new versioning scheme some versions would only have
two numbers now
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:20 PM, clemens fischer
wrote:
> Karol Blazewicz wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:18 PM, clemens fischer <...> wrote:
>>
>>> Mkinitcpio already seems to be smart enough:
>>>
>>> BINARIES="/usr/sbin/minilogd"
>>>
>>> in etc/mkinitcpio.conf should do the trick.
>>
>> S
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Alex Ferrando wrote:
> I've rebuild llvm and clang using gcc 4.6.2 and then reinstalled
> vim-clang-complete. It seems to work.
>
> Now second question, why the fixed version as clang dep?
>
It requires a rebuild with every release of gcc because the gcc paths ch
> Am I the only one reading this thread who sees the inherent
> contradiction of wanting complete control over your system, wanting
> things not to break, yet wanting software to be (relatively
> frequently) updated?
I think the source of the problem is the lack of communication and
documentation
Am 27.10.2011 21:15, schrieb clemens fischer:
> $ readelf -d /usr/sbin/minilogd
>
> Dynamic section at offset 0x1e50 contains 20 entries:
> TagType Name/Value
> 0x0001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
> ...
> $ readelf -d /lib/libc.so.6
>
> Dyn
[2011-10-28 12:40:38 +0200] Alex Ferrando:
> On 28/10/11 08:50, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> >[2011-10-28 08:37:56 +0200] Alex Ferrando:
> >>So, my question now is if it is safe to rebuild clang without the
> >>fixed version dependencie on GCC and then upgrade. Would clang break
> >>if the GCC version is
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:20 PM, clemens fischer
wrote:
> Karol Blazewicz wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:18 PM, clemens fischer <...> wrote:
>>
>>> Mkinitcpio already seems to be smart enough:
>>>
>>> BINARIES="/usr/sbin/minilogd"
>>>
>>> in etc/mkinitcpio.conf should do the trick.
>>
>> S
Karol Blazewicz wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:18 PM, clemens fischer <...> wrote:
>
>> Mkinitcpio already seems to be smart enough:
>>
>> BINARIES="/usr/sbin/minilogd"
>>
>> in etc/mkinitcpio.conf should do the trick.
>
> Sorry if I'm terribly mixing things up, but isn't minilogd dead?
> htt
On 28/10/11 08:50, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
[2011-10-28 08:37:56 +0200] Alex Ferrando:
So, my question now is if it is safe to rebuild clang without the
fixed version dependencie on GCC and then upgrade. Would clang break
if the GCC version is different from 4.6.1?
I wouldn't think it would. Try it
On 10/27/2011 10:38 PM, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Hi
Release 1.1.5
* pam_env: Fix CVE-2011-3148 and CVE-2011-3149
* pam_access: Add hostname resolution cache
* Documentation: Improvements/fixes
please signoff both arches,
greetings
tpowa
signoff i686.
--
Ionuț
On 10/28/11 at 01:46am, Bernardo Barros wrote:
> Or even better, write a haskell program to p0arse the data and to that =))
Sorry, yes. Haskell script, of course :)
--
Or even better, write a haskell program to p0arse the data and to that =))
On 10/28/11 at 10:36am, Magnus Therning wrote:
> monitor. The ideal solution would allow me to get a notification
> whenever a package that requires ghc to build is updated, but that's
> probably a bit much to hope for :)
>
Couldn't you just write a little python script that parses the packages fe
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 09:47, Ionut Biru wrote:
> On 10/28/2011 10:46 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 07:13, Allan McRae wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/10/11 14:49, Magnus Therning wrote:
Is there some convenient way of monitoring changes to the Arch repos?
The
On 10/28/2011 10:46 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 07:13, Allan McRae wrote:
On 28/10/11 14:49, Magnus Therning wrote:
Is there some convenient way of monitoring changes to the Arch repos?
The reason for asking is the work we do in ArchHaskell. Due to how ghc
(the Haskell
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 07:13, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 28/10/11 14:49, Magnus Therning wrote:
>>
>> Is there some convenient way of monitoring changes to the Arch repos?
>>
>> The reason for asking is the work we do in ArchHaskell. Due to how ghc
>> (the Haskell compiler) works it's necessary to r
24 matches
Mail list logo
