Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

Oldiesmann · 2026-04-02 23:25:08

I created an Arch SSO account, verified my email and sent an email to the specified address to have my account allowlisted, but have not gotten a response other than the automated one in a week's time. Does it usually take a while for this to happen or did my request get overlooked?

5hridhyan · 2026-04-03 17:18:38

For me it's been 2 weeks. I guess we should wait.

seth · 2026-04-03 19:24:16

If you've details on a bug I'll file it for you.

Oldiesmann · 2026-04-03 21:28:43

seth wrote:

If you've details on a bug I'll file it for you.

It's not related to a bug at all. I was mainly wanting to weigh in on the discussion about the forum on GitLab.

seth · 2026-04-03 21:51:51

This one?
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … ote_445460

Oldiesmann · 2026-04-04 04:15:02

Yes, that's the one.

aerin · 2026-04-04 19:14:53

Hello,

same for me, I also created an Arch SSO account a week ago and I am still waiting for the allowlisting. The long waiting period seemed unusual, so I searched how to contact someone about this and found this thread while doing so.

Two weeks like 5hridhyan mentions seems quite long to me, is Staff aware about this or is there a known issue?

(I have a regression on my system with kernel 6.19 and wanted to make a bug report)

WorMzy · 2026-04-04 21:03:22

I'm not defending the ridiculous gitlab account situation, but if there's a bug in the kernel, you should file a bug report on the kernel bug tracker. Filing a bug against the Arch Linux package is unlikely to accomplish much.

seth · 2026-04-04 21:19:51

What's the nature of the regression specifically?
As WorMzy pointed out, unless it's explicitly a packaging bug or a problem with the few downstream patches or you want to pitch cherry-picking an upstream patch you'll have to report that upstream.
So we could check whether this is a known issue before you get eaten alive on lkml

aerin · 2026-04-05 07:34:20

Thanks for answering,

depending on how you read the docs, there is no right answer for this: Arch says report upstream, kernel.org says report to your vendor. So if I get chewed out either way, I guess I start at Arch

The nature of the regression is a non-working graphical environment (Xorg). It seems it's got to do with a change how the 6.19 kernel uses drivers for AMD graphics. The problem is reproducible with installing a 6.19 kernel, no other changes were made. I guess I'll create a thread so I don't hijack this one.

seth · 2026-04-05 07:47:55

Check "uname -a" for whether you're actually booting the 6.19 kernel (the most common cause of described symptoms)
When opening a new thread please post your complete system journal for a 6.19 boot:

sudo journalctl -b | nc termbin.com 9999

and your Xorg log, https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Xorg#General after failing to start X11

hazelcaffe · 2026-07-09 05:17:24

Hi!

Oldiesmann or 5hridhyan, have you guys had your accounts whitelisted yet?
I just submitted my allowlist request and I was wondering how long I'd realistically have to wait. Reason I'm creating an account is I'm interesting in hosting a tier 2 Arch mirror.

Thanks.

WorMzy · 2026-07-09 10:04:07

FWIW I requested that forum staff be on boarded over nine months ago. Still hasn't happened. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

5hridhyan · 2026-07-09 13:21:28

Yes.
It took about 4 weeks for me.
Others seem to have had different experience though, so your wait may not be comparable.

jancici · 2026-08-07 13:21:07

I did still find help in wiki or in forum. But situation change few weeks ago.

please, could someone write a "report" to bitcoin package
Looks like it has not build in zmq support so lnd is not able to connect and monitor.

thanks very much

seth · 2026-08-07 15:18:57

Someone might forward a report across the gitlab gate, but how would someone know what kind of bug you're thinking about based one some vague hint at the concern?
Is this related to https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/zeromq/ ?
Nothing in https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … =heads#L84 suggests anything's explicitly disabled.

jancici · 2026-08-07 18:02:19

well, yes I did make mistake saying "looks like"

my bitcoin.conf contain these lines:

#Enable publish raw block in <address>
zmqpubrawblock=tcp://127.0.0.1:28332
Enable publish raw transaction in <address>
zmqpubrawtx=tcp://127.0.0.1:28333

but lnd report in log:

[ERR] LTND: unable to create partial chain control: unable to subscribe for zmq block events: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:28332: connect: connection refused
[ERR] LTND: Shutting down due to error in main method rev=2b8788 err="unable to create partial chain control: unable to subscribe for zmq block events: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:28332: connect: connection refused"

so I did check if that port is open, and it is not:

sudo ss -lnp|grep bitcoin
tcp   LISTEN 0      128                                                                             127.0.0.1:8332             0.0.0.0:*    users:(("bitcoind",pid=377,fd=12))
tcp   LISTEN 0      4096                                                                            127.0.0.1:8333             0.0.0.0:*    users:(("bitcoind",pid=377,fd=33))
tcp   LISTEN 0      4096                                                                        192.168.xx.xx:8333             0.0.0.0:*    users:(("bitcoind",pid=377,fd=32))
tcp   LISTEN 0      128                                                                                 [::1]:8332                [::]:*    users:(("bitcoind",pid=377,fd=11))

yes, I did install zeremq

then also check binary and I did not find dependency

sudo ldd $(which bitcoind)
	linux-vdso.so.1 (0x000066cbac338000)
	libevent_extra-2.1.so.7 => /usr/lib/libevent_extra-2.1.so.7 (0x000066cbac301000)
	libevent_pthreads-2.1.so.7 => /usr/lib/libevent_pthreads-2.1.so.7 (0x000066cbac2fc000)
	libevent_core-2.1.so.7 => /usr/lib/libevent_core-2.1.so.7 (0x000066cbac2c0000)
	libsqlite3.so.0 => /usr/lib/libsqlite3.so.0 (0x000066cbab467000)
	libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x000066cbab000000)
	libm.so.6 => /usr/lib/libm.so.6 (0x000066cbab330000)
	libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x000066cbac291000)
	libc.so.6 => /usr/lib/libc.so.6 (0x000066cbaac00000)
	/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000066cbac33a000)

I remember that version before v30 was working correctly.

seth · 2026-08-07 18:34:46

https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … 371ec28cbc has a bunch of dependency changes, libzmq.so was removed as well.
There's no reason given in the patch nor in https://bitcoincore.org/en/releases/30.0/ or https://bitcoincore.org/en/releases/30.1/
According to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob … d#enabling it's (now? w/ the switch to cmake in 0.30) an opt-in feature

=> https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … rk_items/5

Arch Linux

#1 2026-04-02 23:25:08

Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#2 2026-04-03 17:18:38

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#3 2026-04-03 19:24:16

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#4 2026-04-03 21:28:43

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#5 2026-04-03 21:51:51

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#6 2026-04-04 04:15:02

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#7 2026-04-04 19:14:53

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#8 2026-04-04 21:03:22

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#9 2026-04-04 21:19:51

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#10 2026-04-05 07:34:20

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#11 2026-04-05 07:47:55

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#12 2026-07-09 05:17:24

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#13 2026-07-09 10:04:07

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#14 2026-07-09 13:21:28

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#15 2026-08-07 13:21:07

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#16 2026-08-07 15:18:57

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#17 2026-08-07 18:02:19

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

#18 2026-08-07 18:34:46

Re: Getting Arch SSO account allowlisted

Board footer