On Mon, 2024-07-22 at 12:53 -0400, Genes Lists wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-07-22 at 16:30 +, Doug Newgard wrote:
> >
> > See the note at https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pacman-static
And thank you Morgan for providing package and pre-built binary.
--
Gene
signature.asc
Description: This is
On Mon, 2024-07-22 at 16:30 +, Doug Newgard wrote:
>
> See the note at https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pacman-static
>
> It's from a PM and hosted on Arch infrastructure
Thank you (both) for pointing that out - indeed I missed that.
🙂
gene
--
Gene
signature.asc
Description: This
On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 12:15:26 -0400
Genes Lists wrote:
> It does bring up a question and am interested how you think about it.
>Â
> While pretty rare, there certainly can be occasions where an official
> static pacman could be pretty helpful to have.
>Â
See the note at https://aur.archlinux.org/p
While pretty rare, there certainly can be occasions where an official
static pacman could be pretty helpful to have.
Its fairly non-trivial to build a static pacman since we don't have
archive libs readily available for the 38 packages it depends on (at
least that I can see). (…)
Hello,
Morga
On Mon, 2024-07-22 at 09:29 +0200, David Runge wrote:
> Hi all,
> ...
> have to use an installation media or static pacman to get back to
> 3.0.0-1.
> ...
> David
>
Hey David - no worries these kind of things happen on occasion and it
was only in testing, where users of which should mostly know
