On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 16:02:37 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 14:02:42 +0200, David Runge wrote: >>Also, please don't double post your issues. Give people time to >>actually respond. No need to post to arch-general, if you brought this >>up before. This is not an instant messenger service. > >PS: Independent of what is required for a realtime (or the old audio) >group and that there is no issue when using >limits.d/file_with_a_higher_number.conf , I still question that >'@users - memlock 1024' should be set by package. I doubt that a >default 'memlock 1024' for the 'users' group is a good choice at all. PPS: And I forgot to mention, what Fons' pointed out and actually was the issue that I experienced: On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 16:55:49 +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote: >But that effectively means you need to opt out of whatever some >'vendor' pushes down your throat. Not once, but everytime you update. The link to the complete message: https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-proaudio/2018-September/000201.html So at least an announcement via https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-announce should be considered. -- pacman -Q linux{,-rt{-pussytoes,-cornflower,,-securityink}}|cut -d\ -f2 4.18.5.arch1-1 4.18_rc8_rt1-1 4.16.18_rt12-1 4.16.18_rt11-1 4.16.18_rt10-1
