pacman 3.1.0

01-10-2008, 02:21 AM

Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.

I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.

NOTE: this is a signoff email only, and deals with the *packaging* and
not the *application*. This is NOT the place for bugs, issues, etc.
Please start a new thread either here or on pacman-dev, or file a bug
report. Thank you.

Travis- do you want to start a signoff for abs? If so, you have an
i686 signoff from me.

-Dan

01-10-2008, 04:29 AM

On Jan 9, 2008 10:21 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
> Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
>
> I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.
>
> NOTE: this is a signoff email only, and deals with the *packaging* and
> not the *application*. This is NOT the place for bugs, issues, etc.
> Please start a new thread either here or on pacman-dev, or file a bug
> report. Thank you.

Seems OK to me. Signoff, i686

> Travis- do you want to start a signoff for abs? If so, you have an
> i686 signoff from me.

Yeah, I do. Thread started - thanks for the reminder.

01-10-2008, 04:57 AM

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Travis Willard wrote:

On Jan 9, 2008 10:21 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:

Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.

I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.

NOTE: this is a signoff email only, and deals with the *packaging* and
not the *application*. This is NOT the place for bugs, issues, etc.
Please start a new thread either here or on pacman-dev, or file a bug
report. Thank you.

Seems OK to me. Signoff, i686

Works fine here. Signoff for both arches.

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

01-10-2008, 10:29 AM

Thursday 10 January 2008, Dan McGee wrote:
| Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
|
| I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.

singing in the rain for x86_64

looks great,

- D

--
.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸ .·´
° ° °
° ° °
><((((º> ° °
° °
° <º)))><
<º)))><

01-10-2008, 12:26 PM

Dan McGee schrieb:
> Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
>
> I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.

Signoff for both, upgrade path seems fine.

01-10-2008, 04:27 PM

On Jan 10, 2008 7:26 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Dan McGee schrieb:
> > Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
> >
> > I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.
>
> Signoff for both, upgrade path seems fine.

Signed off i686, didn't fully test on x86_64 (but Dan you have sudo
rights, so I'd imagine that signoff would be the same)

01-11-2008, 11:02 AM

On Jan 10, 2008 8:51 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:

Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.

Signed off, x86_64

01-12-2008, 08:25 AM

Am Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2008 04:21:21 schrieb Dan McGee:
> Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.

signoff (both). I have tested pacman itself and makepkg; no problems so far.

--
archlinux.de

01-13-2008, 07:29 AM

Am Samstag, 12. Januar 2008 schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
> Am Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2008 04:21:21 schrieb Dan McGee:
> > Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
>
> signoff (both). I have tested pacman itself and makepkg; no problems so
> far.

signoff for both arches
worked so far, good job dan

greetings
tpowa

--
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa@archlinux.org