FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-30-2007, 10:48 AM
Tom K
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
upload this for x86_64.

Please note that this signoff request supercedes Dan's, posted a couple
of days ago:
http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-November/003430.html

Regards
T.

_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 11-30-2007, 04:00 PM
"Aaron Griffin"
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

On Nov 30, 2007 5:48 AM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
> general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
> upload this for x86_64.

Perfect time to test makechrootpkg 8)

Seems to work fine methinks, but your md5sums were wrong... can you
verify here - either the file wasn't updated or the md5sums were off.

_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 11-30-2007, 04:06 PM
"Aaron Griffin"
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

On Nov 30, 2007 11:00 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 2007 5:48 AM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> > New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
> > general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
> > upload this for x86_64.
>
> Perfect time to test makechrootpkg 8)
>
> Seems to work fine methinks, but your md5sums were wrong... can you
> verify here - either the file wasn't updated or the md5sums were off.

Uhh?

shadow W: File (bin/) exists in a non-standard directory.
shadow W: File (bin/groups) exists in a non-standard directory.
shadow W: File (bin/login) exists in a non-standard directory.

namcap bug?

_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 11-30-2007, 04:07 PM
"Roman Kyrylych"
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

2007/11/30, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> On Nov 30, 2007 11:00 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 2007 5:48 AM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> > > New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
> > > general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
> > > upload this for x86_64.
> >
> > Perfect time to test makechrootpkg 8)
> >
> > Seems to work fine methinks, but your md5sums were wrong... can you
> > verify here - either the file wasn't updated or the md5sums were off.
>
> Uhh?
>
> shadow W: File (bin/) exists in a non-standard directory.
> shadow W: File (bin/groups) exists in a non-standard directory.
> shadow W: File (bin/login) exists in a non-standard directory.
>
> namcap bug?

Yeah, I saw it many times. I guess it's fixed in 2.0.

--
Roman Kyrylych (*оман Кирилич)
_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 11-30-2007, 06:49 PM
Tom K
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Nov 30, 2007 5:48 AM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
>> New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
>> general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
>> upload this for x86_64.
>
> Perfect time to test makechrootpkg 8)

OK.. last time I tried it, it bombed, and I didn't have time to attempt
a debug. I'll have another look.

>
> Seems to work fine methinks, but your md5sums were wrong... can you
> verify here - either the file wasn't updated or the md5sums were off.

Need some advice here. The md5sum discrepancy is caused by the presence
of a "$Id:.." line in the login.defs file. This is updated during
check-in, invalidating the checksum in the PKGBUILD.

Why is that line there? I've only ever seen it in PKGBUILDs before. Can
I take it out?

_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 11-30-2007, 06:57 PM
"Aaron Griffin"
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

On Nov 30, 2007 1:49 PM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 2007 5:48 AM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> >> New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
> >> general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
> >> upload this for x86_64.
> >
> > Perfect time to test makechrootpkg 8)
>
> OK.. last time I tried it, it bombed, and I didn't have time to attempt
> a debug. I'll have another look.

Aw no, I meant for me - I can test it. Or I can give you an account on
my build machine (send me a personal email, plox!)

> > Seems to work fine methinks, but your md5sums were wrong... can you
> > verify here - either the file wasn't updated or the md5sums were off.
>
> Need some advice here. The md5sum discrepancy is caused by the presence
> of a "$Id:.." line in the login.defs file. This is updated during
> check-in, invalidating the checksum in the PKGBUILD.
>
> Why is that line there? I've only ever seen it in PKGBUILDs before. Can
> I take it out?

I'd say remove it. It's neat and useful sure, but it's apparently
causing headaches...

_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 11-30-2007, 06:58 PM
"Dan McGee"
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

On Nov 30, 2007 1:49 PM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 2007 5:48 AM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> >> New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
> >> general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
> >> upload this for x86_64.
> >
> > Perfect time to test makechrootpkg 8)
>
> OK.. last time I tried it, it bombed, and I didn't have time to attempt
> a debug. I'll have another look.
>
> >
> > Seems to work fine methinks, but your md5sums were wrong... can you
> > verify here - either the file wasn't updated or the md5sums were off.
>
> Need some advice here. The md5sum discrepancy is caused by the presence
> of a "$Id:.." line in the login.defs file. This is updated during
> check-in, invalidating the checksum in the PKGBUILD.
>
> Why is that line there? I've only ever seen it in PKGBUILDs before. Can
> I take it out?

Ugh, stupid. Kill it!

-Dan

_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 
Old 12-03-2007, 03:13 AM
Jason Chu
 
Default shadow 4.0.18.2-1

On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 07:07:32PM +0200, Roman Kyrylych wrote:
> 2007/11/30, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> > On Nov 30, 2007 11:00 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 30, 2007 5:48 AM, Tom K <tom@archlinux.org> wrote:
> > > > New upstream shadow release, plus fixes for FS#8050/8051/8724/8742, and
> > > > general PKGBUILD tidy-up. I would be grateful if someone could build and
> > > > upload this for x86_64.
> > >
> > > Perfect time to test makechrootpkg 8)
> > >
> > > Seems to work fine methinks, but your md5sums were wrong... can you
> > > verify here - either the file wasn't updated or the md5sums were off.
> >
> > Uhh?
> >
> > shadow W: File (bin/) exists in a non-standard directory.
> > shadow W: File (bin/groups) exists in a non-standard directory.
> > shadow W: File (bin/login) exists in a non-standard directory.
> >
> > namcap bug?
>
> Yeah, I saw it many times. I guess it's fixed in 2.0.

Actually, I wanted to keep /bin & /sbin displaying messages. I'd rather
have developers see those messages and think, "should my package really be
storing files in /bin and /sbin or do these binaries belong in /usr/bin and
/usr/sbin?" than not notice this at all.

I could see these messages being common in core packages but not packages
in extra or community.

Jason
_______________________________________________
arch-dev-public mailing list
arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:00 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org