Re: [arch-general] Dnscryp-proxy v2 support

On March 24, 2018 10:21 AM, Ngô Huy wrote: > Dnscrypt-proxy v1 has been deleted and then no longer active, version 2 has > > been released 2.0.7 https://github.com/jedisct1/dnscrypt-proxy/releases. > > Can we rebuild and support new version ? > > Best regards, > > Severus https://bugs.archli

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] LLVM 6 and splitting up {clang, lld, lldb, compiler-rt} into separate PKGBUILDs

On March 9, 2018 1:26 PM, Evangelos Foutras via arch-dev-public wrote: > I pushed llvm 6.0.0-1 to \[staging\] without the rest of the packages > > mentioned in the subject. I am planning to add them back as individual > > packages in the following days. > > This separation will bring faster b

Re: [arch-general] godep has been deprecated in favor of dep

On February 25, 2018 2:51 AM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > On 02/24/2018 09:18 PM, Adam Levy via arch-general wrote: > > > Hello > > > > Today I noticed that as of about 30ish days ago godep ( > > > > github.com/tools/godep) has been archived and is no longer supported. The > > > >

Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...

> Original Message > Subject: Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ... > Local Time: October 13, 2017 9:01 AM > UTC Time: October 13, 2017 7:01 AM > From: arch-general@archlinux.org > To: arch-general@archlinux.org > Leonidas Spyropoulos > > On 13/10/17, Ralf Mar

Re: [arch-general] Is there anything keeping the refind version back?

> Original Message > Subject: [arch-general] Is there anything keeping the refind version back? > Local Time: October 13, 2017 11:21 AM > UTC Time: October 13, 2017 9:21 AM > From: arch-general@archlinux.org > To: General Discussion about Arch Linux > mike lojkovic > > refind-ef

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] systemd, kernel keyring and pam_keyinit

As gdm/sddm include it's own pam_keynit module before sourcing system-login it'll be effectively called twice. Is this a problem? > Original Message > Subject: Re: [arch-dev-public] systemd, kernel keyring and pam_keyinit > Local Time: October 6, 2017 1:04 PM > UTC Time: October

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] systemd, kernel keyring and pam_keyinit

That was already requested some time ago [1], see also comments. Good move. [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/54915 > Original Message > Subject: [arch-dev-public] systemd, kernel keyring and pam_keyinit > Local Time: September 18, 2017 12:29 PM > UTC Time: September 18, 2017 1

Re: [arch-general] intel-gpu-tools updated PKGBUILD

h Linux > > On 08/17/17 at 07:33am, Jordan Glover via arch-general wrote: >> I prepared updated PKGBUILD for intel-gpu-tools package[1] which is flagged >> out-of-date since 2016-12-05. >> >> I updated it to newest version (1.19), updated PGP key to currently used >

[arch-general] intel-gpu-tools updated PKGBUILD

I prepared updated PKGBUILD for intel-gpu-tools package[1] which is flagged out-of-date since 2016-12-05. I updated it to newest version (1.19), updated PGP key to currently used one, upgraded hash to sha256, added new dependencies found by namcap and generally enhanced PKGBUILD to highest Arch

Re: [arch-general] Changing compilation flags

I testes some rebuilded binaries and BINDNOW isn't always enabled: checksec -f /usr/bin/unrar RELRO Partial RELRO checksec -f /usr/bin/qml (qt5-declarative) RELRO Partial RELRO I don't know if -fno-plt was correctly passed but it's possible that build process doesn't work as intended. Maybe we nee

Re: [arch-general] Changing compilation flags

I see [1] -fstack-check is dropped and -fstack-protector-strong kept while being redundant. Anyone know what happened? [1] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/pacman&id=0cd22d4454e0e1b3ae589b95274f808001465c15 On 2017-06-30 23:44, Allan McRae wrote: > On 30/0

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Changing compilation flags

My idea was to have general CC=, CXX=... options set in makepkg.conf, then makepkg would use: CFLAGS_GCC when CC=gcc and CFLAGS_CLANG when CC=clang This way instead of setting common minimal compatible flags we could enable all features that compiler have and maintainer/user would only need to se

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Changing compilation flags

I'm surprised as it seemed to me that Daniel took it for granted that patch like that will get accepted. Anyway it's hard for an outsider to successfully submit anything to big upstream project. I hope you'll be more lucky if/when you decide to upstream your pie/ssp patches. It would be nice if

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Changing compilation flags

FYI clang devs don't want to take 1 line patch adding another no-op flag upstream. https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2017-July/054588.html > Original Message > Subject: Re: [arch-dev-public] Changing compilation flags > From: arch-dev-pub...@archlinux.org > To: Evangelos

[arch-general] [PATCH]:[Clang] Add -fno-plt, -fplt to ignored flags

In GCC there is a -fno-plt flag not implemented in Clang which results in compilation failure: clang-4.0: error: unknown argument: '-fno-plt' Proposed patch adds -fno-plt and -fplt to existing ignored flags list making it compatible with gcc for package building. You can see more info about tho

Re: [arch-general] Changing compilation flags

I just looked into it and created simple patch. Anyone could test it and/or submit upstream? Index: include/clang/Driver/Options.td --- include/clang/Driver/Options.td +++ include/clang/Driver/Options.td @@ -2497,6 +2497,7 @@ defm non_call_exceptions : BooleanFFlag<"non-call-exceptions">, Group;