I asked that this request is dismissed. I believe my package is superior to the other cursor package including the one mentioned.
>From my comment on AUR: This package is not a duplicate of cursor-appimage. They use different source artifacts and have different packaging approaches: cursor-ide-bin extracts from the official .deb release, installs to standard FHS paths (cursor), includes shell completions, MIME types, and appdata, has a complete dependency list (10 runtime deps + 3 optional), and uses the correct SPDX license identifier. cursor-appimage extracts a squashfs from the AppImage into opt, is missing several dependencies (libdrm, mesa, dbus, libsecret, libxkbfile), and ships no completions or MIME types. Multiple packages for the same upstream software using different source formats is standard on the AUR (e.g. firefox-bin vs firefox). The AUR wiki explicitly allows this. On Monday, March 16th, 2026 at 5:32 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > oech3 [1] filed a deletion request for cursor-ide-bin [2]: > > cursor-appimage extracts and keeps Electron > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/oech3/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/cursor-ide-bin/
