You are not logged in.

#1 2010-03-14 23:37:25

ilpianista
Fellow developer
From: Lecce, Italy
Registered: 2007-10-06
Posts: 567
Website

Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

Hi Archers,
seems that I packaged Amarok 2.3 before the official release. This means that we are using a Release Candidate not the stable 2.3, so please do not report any bug about this version on bugs.kde.org.
Amarok 2.3-2 will be the real Amarok 2.3 which will released tomorrow at this time.

Thank you

Offline

#2 2010-03-14 23:44:52

Skripka
Member
From: 2X1280X1024
Registered: 2009-02-19
Posts: 554

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

Ooops. smile


I kinda like it, despite being a RC and all.

Offline

#3 2010-03-14 23:48:27

ilpianista
Fellow developer
From: Lecce, Italy
Registered: 2007-10-06
Posts: 567
Website

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

Skripka wrote:

I kinda like it, despite being a RC and all.

yes, it's very cool tongue

[/OT]

Offline

#4 2010-03-15 02:08:50

idupree
Member
Registered: 2010-02-21
Posts: 10

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

I *knew* something was up with 'extra' containing a newer version than amarok.kde.org! :-)

And now Google has found me your answer.

Offline

#5 2010-03-15 03:12:36

ngoonee
Forum Fellow
From: Between Thailand and Singapore
Registered: 2009-03-17
Posts: 6,838

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

Haven't you realized, Arch is secretly a global experiment on time-travel. Why else would we get our packages so quickly? In this case Andrea messed up though, he forgot to re-sync his clock when time-travelling back with the source code....


Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Offline

#6 2010-03-15 21:28:07

ilpianista
Fellow developer
From: Lecce, Italy
Registered: 2007-10-06
Posts: 567
Website

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

well...they released Amarok 2.3 just now; I did a md5sums on the tarball and checksum is the same I used -.-'

amarok-2.3-1 is Amarok 2.3!

Offline

#7 2010-03-15 21:33:36

Skripka
Member
From: 2X1280X1024
Registered: 2009-02-19
Posts: 554

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

bash wrote:

well...they released Amarok 2.3 just now; I did a md5sums on the tarball and checksum is the same I used -.-'

So I take it that you don't think the Amarok team could have beat the 1 in 2^128 odds of having two different tarballs with the same random hash? wink

Offline

#8 2010-03-15 21:50:36

ilpianista
Fellow developer
From: Lecce, Italy
Registered: 2007-10-06
Posts: 567
Website

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

Skripka wrote:

So I take it that you don't think the Amarok team could have beat the 1 in 2^128 odds of having two different tarballs with the same random hash? wink

go to ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/amarok/2.3.0/src/ , Last Modified says: 2010-03-10 23:27

$ pacman -Qi amarok | grep "Build Date"
Build Date     : Sat 13 Mar 2010 08:20:39 PM CET

So I think we are using the right tarball wink

Offline

#9 2010-03-15 21:59:35

gtklocker
Member
Registered: 2009-09-01
Posts: 460

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

Yes, you did... smile

I can't see the time you push it to the [extra] repo big_smile

Offline

#10 2010-03-15 22:03:40

ilpianista
Fellow developer
From: Lecce, Italy
Registered: 2007-10-06
Posts: 567
Website

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

gtklocker wrote:

I can't see the time you push it to the [extra] repo big_smile

you can tongue http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/package … ra-x86_64/

Offline

#11 2010-03-15 22:06:39

gtklocker
Member
Registered: 2009-09-01
Posts: 460

Re: Amarok 2.3-1 is not Amarok 2.3!

http://archlinux.me/gtklocker/2010/03/0 … pos-speed/

I second that tongue

big_smile

Last edited by gtklocker (2010-03-15 22:06:48)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB