hello. GnuPG 2.2.25 has been released it fixes bug which affects me. but
arch only has Version 2.2.24-1 in testing. my question is why it haven't
been updated? if the maintainer simply does not have time yet, then I
understand, but maybe there is another reason?
There is only one bug fixed bet
Thunderbird asks me to migrate my keys, and I am not
sure, if I should not wait a few more days.
Whatever you choose, a warning: set a strong master password for
Thunderbird before doing the migration. Otherwise Thunderbird stores
your private key unencrypted and there is no warning about the
On 9/12/20 5:41 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> Following the [arch-dev-public] Pam lockout thread,
>
> Can we just remove the faillock entries from /etc/pam.d/login without
> breaking anything if we don't need it at all (like for home computers, etc..)
> (…)
Not elegant, but moves faillock out of
> Is it possible to update it in [testing] at least?
This version is not an “upgradeable” release, as stated by the
upstream. Not considered “next version” in the upgrades sequence. The
next version after 68.11 is 78.2, which is not released yet.
Hypothetically [testing] could provide that rel
> Is there any reason the package is stuck to version 68?
The reason is given on the very top of the page you have linked.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
> This is more of what is the recommended practice ... for handling pacman.log?
Mine is 10 years old, is 7MB. On a 1TB drive. Why would you ever want
to remove it? After 1000 years it will be 700MB, not even 0.1% of the drive.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
> On update today (yesterday's updates went fine), I am prompted to approve
> import of the following key a number of times: […]
> :: Import PGP key 3B94A80E50A477C7, "Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) […]
Oh, “the heftig bug” ;). While Simon Wilper has provided the solution,
here is some backgro
> hi. a month ago i ran out of room on my root file system, so relocated
> /var/cache/pacman to /home, and left behind a symlink. (…)
“/var/cache/pacman” is owned by pacman and is supposed to be a
directory. If you have removed the directory and create a symlink
instead, the next update has simp
> Actually this 2 minutes bothers me this much that I'm emailing Arch
> General Mailing List is because I'm afraid my Arch would be broken if my
> laptop shuts down in this process and I have to rescue it by live USB.
For nearly a decade of using this particular Arch installation alone,
I never h
> I'd really like to use the Firefox browser (currently using Iridium), but
> I'm seeing a strange behavior where it "stalls" intermittently. The
> rendering engine seems to randomly pause activity (i.e. not responsive to
> scrolling input), and these pauses can last for several seconds. It also
>
> I didn't know about this repository on GitLab, but if you go to the
> official Clisp site (https://www.gnu.org/software/clisp/), you will see
> that the latest version (2.49) was released on 2010-07-07.
For clarification and providing a verifiable source: that SourceForge
page is ancient. The r
> Randomly open a dictionary and then randomly pointing on a word,
> repeating this a few times, is one way for an artist to get an
> inspiration.
>
> I wonder how safe it is to use such a method to generate a passphrase.
An old Chinese proverb says: do not invent your own crypto.
Diceware is
> "IMO an averaged "strong" but still memorizable passphrase, even when
> following obsolet rules, is ok."
But we do not need to follow any obsolete rules anymore.
> In a follow-up email unfortunately send after your reply, I exactly
> describe the apartment door scenario.
Which I have indirec
> Black hats are able to hack Google and Facebook, what ever you
> will do, you never ever will be able to reach the level of security
> those and the other most successful computer related companies are able
> to accomplish.
In 2015 four men have stolen equivalent of 200M GBP from Hatton Garden
tl;dr: follow standard practices — there is nothing special about
passwords for private keys.
> I want to publish a package repository with some packages that I need
> and only want to build once for all my systems.
>
> I want to make the packages available for general use. I have server
> spac
> A day back, i made a fresh install of Arch on my desktop. It is completely
> fresh as like it doesnt even have an account other than root.
> My doubt is, wont basic tools like python come in Arch install? or do we
> have to install by ourselves?
You are the administrator. You are choosing what
> I have read that article in ArchWiki. I understand that point that MIT
> licences are all custom because of individual copyright line. But then I do
> not understand when should I use license=('MIT') instead of
> license=('custom')?
> I have read that MIT is a set of licenses, but it is kinda
> Hello. I was repacking amdgpu-pro deb files and when I started converting
> licences, I have noticed that libdrm* packages have a MIT Licence text in
> copyright file. I decided to check if AUR/libdrm-git and Extra/libdrm uses
> MIT licence, but they don't. I contacted Lone_Wolf (maintainer of
> I just used the /var/log/pacman.log for the first time to give me the
> last date-time I did a system upgrade ('starting full system upgrade' in
> the log). There is no time-zone info in the time-stamp. It's also not
> UTC. Does anyone know if this is by design or a bug?
`pacman` uses local tim
> since some days, I'm noticing HD is too busy, and my laptop is very slow
> in some cases.
>
> Are there any invisible background threads running? How can I find out
> about those? Running top, cpu use should be only about 30%, so it should
> wait for tasks to be executed, instead.
iotop should
>>> It states MIT/BSD are special cases, just out of curiousity, what makes
>>> them special that they cannot be added?
>> Because there is no MIT or 1/2/3-clause BSD license. There are
>> hundreds of independent, barely related licenses that are quite similar
>> and, therefore, are considere
> It states MIT/BSD are special cases, just out of curiousity, what makes them
> special that they cannot be added?
Because there is no MIT or 1/2/3-clause BSD license. There are
hundreds of independent, barely related licenses that are quite similar
and, therefore, are considered together as a
> (…) My goal is to build using multiple jobs (-j option for make).
Consider -l instead of -j, with -j being used only to limit the number
of subprocesses -l could spawn. For example:
make -l 4 -j 100 …
This will ensure make’s load is approximately 4. The additional `-j
some_bigger_number` is
While Patrick is right and I agree that you should use the proper
compiler for the given language, it is not true that your assumption
about filenames was wrong.
The `gcc` command is choosing the compiler for the file based on its
suffix¹. Files ending with “.cc” are among these considered to
>> Notice how the Content-Length: header is missing.
> Thanks for the clear explanations, at least I understand what's happening,
> it's up to remote to fix.
Don’t write them to fix that, as nothing is broken: Content-Length is
not required.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
>>> why does a package from official repositories mentions what version
>>> of a dependency is required?
>> Because it may be that it is working only with that particular
>> version.
> That doesn't explain why it is needed or in any way useful for a package
> provided by official Arch repositori
> why does a package from official repositories mentions what version of
> a dependency is required?
Because it may be that it is working only with that particular
version. The two common scenarios are:
1) The package requires protocol/API/ABI/header/etc-level
compatibility. You may see
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
The issue is solve now: one should contact another op (not the one
responsible for the ban).
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEERGuTZCqWmv5+0VD7fISBmK6T07sFAll5NRkACgkQfISBmK6T
07uSRAf/USHM81Uc+i9JV5WItjOSqE4ZpCj0UiETCRYMPF0M0R3NjsMFQk
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I’m asking for an advice on how to proceed. I am *not* discussing
the reasons or trying to rant.
The situation is:
— On July 25th at 3:10 UTC I have been banned on #archlinux-offtopic
with the reason „fuck you” and a warning „next time y
29 matches
Mail list logo
