summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/libre
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2022-04-27libre: pureos-archive-keyring: clarify provenance in PKGBUILDDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
This will avoid futhurer mistakes. The provenance is given by the following commit: commit b352336136d45de172ed012d0871f11dc1ecf672 Author: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org> Date: Thu Oct 25 00:48:43 2018 +0200 Add pureos-archive-keyring This PKGBUILD is based on arch's ubuntu-keyring version 2018.02.28-1.0 Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-04-27libre: pureos-archive-keyring: fix copyright headerDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
The provenance is given by the following commit: commit b352336136d45de172ed012d0871f11dc1ecf672 Author: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org> Date: Thu Oct 25 00:48:43 2018 +0200 Add pureos-archive-keyring This PKGBUILD is based on arch's ubuntu-keyring version 2018.02.28-1.0 This reverts commit 0b3346d1338d6ee2c813996897aa53d9c9e641e6. (libre: pureos-archive-keyring: Add copyright header). Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-04-27libre: pureos-archive-keyring: Add copyright headerDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-04-24Move nvramtool from libre to PCRDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
Despite what its name suggest, the PCR repository is not only for PKGBUILDs that come from AUR. In the Parabola wiki[1], there is the criteria for packages meant to go in PCR, and we can deduce from what is written there that PCR is for packages that both: * "are not included on official repos of Arch Linux"[1] * "are not considered to be essential enough for the base system."[1] So here even if the nvramtool PKGBUILD doesn't come from AUR, it is meant to go in PCR. [1]https://wiki.parabola.nu/Repositories#.5Bpcr.5D Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-04-23[archlinux32-keyring]: rebuildbill-auger
2022-04-23[pacman]: documentation for previous changebill-auger
2022-04-22[pacman]: bugfix previous changebill-auger
2022-04-22[pacman]: allow pacstrap to create cross-arch chrootsbill-auger
2022-04-20updpkg: libre/kdevelop 21.12.3-1.parabola1David P
Signed-off-by: David P <megver83@parabola.nu>
2022-04-20[linux-libre-api-headers]: upgrade to v5.17.3bill-auger
2022-04-20[linux-libre]: upgrade to v5.17.3 (x86_64 only)bill-auger
2022-04-19libre: add nvramtoolDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-04-14[parabola-hackers]: upgrade to v20210719bill-auger
2022-04-12[qutebrowser]: upgrade to v2.5.0bill-auger
2022-04-12[pacman]: remove ancient provides/conflictsbill-auger
this 'pacman' package replaced 'pacman-parabola' in 2014, when pacman was at major ver 4 - it is extremely unlikely that anyone would attempt upgrading a system that old, or that it would be successful 9d87540a9f774ae8a808d1a3bb6d9b112277accd i would suggest as a rule of thumb, to place _some_ reasonable limit on backward-compatibilty (eg: 5 years, or 2 pacman major versions) it has been 8 years and we are at pacman 6 now - it is safe to declare 'pacman-parabola' as irrelevant/obsolete
2022-04-12[nmap]: remove packagebill-auger
2022-04-12[your-freedom]: correct checksumbill-auger
2022-04-12housekeeping - remove mentions of qt5-webengine from pkgdescbill-auger
2022-04-12[iceweasel]: i686 still FTBSbill-auger
2022-04-11libre/iceweasel: Update to 99.0 according to upstream changesgrizzlyuser
2022-04-11libre/iceweasel: Update existing and add new patchgrizzlyuser
1. Code has been moved from bookmarks.html.in to another file, see [1] 2. Code from region.properties has been moved as well, see [2] 3. Mozilla added yet another page for promotion of their products, this time it's in Preferences, and is called "More from Mozilla", which contains QR code and a feature to send a link to email, which lead to Firefox Mobile, which is not compatible with the FSDG. So the page has been removed. [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1749435 [2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1733497
2022-04-11libre/iceweasel: Sync with upstream 98.0.1grizzlyuser
2022-04-06libre: linux-libre-64: Update to 5.15.12 by syncing with linux-libreDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-04-06libre: remove uboot-sunxiDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
The uboot-sunxi PKGBUILD is completely unmaintained and it has long been replaced by the uboo4extlinux-sunxi PKGBUILD. All the devices that were supported by uboot-sunxi are now supported by the uboo4extlinux-sunxi PKGBUILD. Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-04-05[your-freedom]: manual rebuildbill-auger
2022-04-03[your-freedom]: manual rebuildbill-auger
2022-03-31treewide: Maintainer: GNUtoo: clarify the maintainer situationDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
The status quo is that any Parabola hacker is expected to (be able to) modify any packages, and having a single maintainer of a package discourages that practice as people would typically send a patch to the maintainer instead of pushing it directly. So for a start we can add common maintainership on package lacking any "Maintainer: " header for packages in repositories that are supposed to be maintained. As for finding who worked on a given package (in case it could be needed), the git log should have all the information. Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-03-31treewide: clarify the maintainer situation on packages lacking oneDenis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
The status quo is that any Parabola hacker is expected to (be able to) modify any packages, and having a single maintainer of a package discourages that practice as people would typically send a patch to the maintainer instead of pushing it directly. So for a start we can add common maintainership on package lacking any "Maintainer: " header for packages in repositories that are supposed to be maintained. Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-03-26[qt5-styleplugins]: rebuild (i686) against latest qt-basebill-auger
2022-03-26[parabola-keyring]: manual rebuildbill-auger
2022-03-26[iceweasel]: revert v98 brandingbill-auger
this build has problem with playback of some media files https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2022-March/008200.html reverting the branding changes only as a precaution, to reduce the diff, until that problem goes away most likely, there is nothing wrong with the branding changes though, and they are not the cause of the media troubles they worked fine against 97.0.2
2022-03-26[iceweasel]: housekeepingbill-auger
2022-03-26[iceweasel]: upgrade to v98.0bill-auger
2022-03-26[iceweasel]: rename user profile dirbill-auger
this corresponds to (requires) the change in iceweasel-branding.git with commit message: 'rename user profile dir'
2022-03-26[iceweasel]: branding (#3196)bill-auger
2022-03-26[iceweasel]: tweak for i686bill-auger
2022-03-26[iceweasel]: build against libvpx=1.11.0-1bill-auger
2022-03-26[archlinux32-keyring]: housekeepingbill-auger
2022-03-24libre: uboot4extlinux-sunxi: switch upstream to not redistribute any nonfree ↵Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
software If we use prepare() instead of mksource(), we end up redistributing nonfree software inside the package source, and it would be better not to have to do that as this could potentially create licensing issues. The standard solution to avoid that in Parabola is to use mksource(), however while this worked fine with other packages, I didn't manage to make it work with this package, probably because the package code is complex and that we don't fit into simpler cases handled by mksource(). The complexity here comes from the need to lower the maintenance cost of supporting multiple ARM computers and setups: the automation enables to more easily add new computers, make testing way faster, and simplify the installation instructions. Since at the end of the day the goal was to share this deblobing work with other FSDG compliant distributions, I looked for a distro neutral project that could be interested in deblobing u-boot and which has also some infrastructure that we could reuse for that (this avoids costs in time and money of setting up new infrastructure and of maintaining it). As Libreboot planned to add support for u-boot anyway and that its build system is distribution neutral, it was a good fit. As for the ability to have patches merged in Libreboot for u-boot-libre, the initial discussions were complicated: - Libreboot releases sources and binaries of bootloaders targeting specific computers. So it would be natural to deblob u-boot and on top of that, add support for specific computers in Libreboot in the exact same way it is done for the computers that are supported through deblobed versions of Coreboot. However here we want the various distributions (like Parabola and Guix) to be able to use deblobed u-boot source tarballs that follow very closely upstream u-boot releases, and that only have changes related to deblobing. Linux-libre does the latter and this makes it very easy for FSDG compliant distributions to reuse it as-is. When adding support for specific computers through u-boot, Libreboot would instead be more interested in having specific configuration through u-boot environment and/or by combining u-boot with other bootloaders like GRUB. It would also be interested in having the ability to choose specific u-boot versions and specific extra patches to support specific computers. As distributions and Libreboot requirements are very similar (they both need to deblob u-boot) and also slightly different, it was not easy to get that point across, and I hope that people reading this commit also get the point across. - Once I managed to get an agreement that doing that was a good idea and that I would be able to get my code merged (provided that the code quality was good) and have Libreboot release the files needed, I started to implement the code, but I found out week(s) later that the agreement was gone. The fix for that was simply to restart explaining it all from scratch and get an agreement again. Beside the initial complications, getting the code reviewed and merged was really fast (each patch serie review took 1 week or less) and we can now just ping the Libreboot maintainer on IRC to get files released. According to the Libreboot maintainer I'm the de-facto maintainer of the u-boot related code in Libreboot, so I'll probably have to be involved somehow in reviewing the code, and then we need to ping her to get the code merged. The discussions were done in #libreboot on liberachat, and the merge requests were sent against Libreboot repositories (both lbmk and lbwww) in notabug, so following a similar method will probably result in future patches being merged rapidely if we hope/assume that I will manage to review the patches as fast as the Libreboot maintainer did. Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
2022-03-09libre/python-reportlab: updatedAndreas Grapentin
2022-03-08[qt5-styleplugins]: rebuild against latest qt5-basebill-auger
2022-03-08[archlinux32-keyring]: rebuildbill-auger
2022-03-07[iceweasel]: upgrade to v97.0.2bill-auger
2022-03-07libre/iceweasel: 97.0, add missing i686 patchgrizzlyuser
Update according to changes from upstreams. The source of patch for i686 is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1729459#c21
2022-02-14licenses-20220125-1.parabola1: updating versionOmar Vega Ramos
2022-02-13systemd-250.3-4.parabola1: rebuildOmar Vega Ramos
2022-02-09updpkg: libre/parabolaiso 61-1David P
Signed-off-by: David P <megver83@parabola.nu>
2022-02-09linux-libre-firmware: split whence, add new conflictsDavid P
Signed-off-by: David P <megver83@parabola.nu>
2022-02-08[archlinux32-keyring]: rebuild v20220131-1.1bill-auger
2022-02-08[archlinux32-keyring]: upgrade to v20220131bill-auger