Re: [aur-general] virtualbox-extension-pack vs. virtualbox-ext-oracle
Laurent Carlier lordhea...@gmail.com on Mon, 2014/08/04 23:11:
Le lundi 4 août 2014, 18:15:32 Christian Hesse a écrit :
Hello everybody,
following a lengthy discussion sublu just deleted my package
virtualbox-extension-pack from AUR. This is what his package
(virtualbox-ext-oracle) does:
* Install an archive file.
* Use install script to copy a number of files to /usr without pacman
knowing about it.
I think this is the wrong way, so I created my own package
(virtualbox-extension-pack) that tries to get it right:
* Just install the files required, ready to use for virtualbox.
* No crappy install script required!
My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more if
more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of
comments that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files
to /usr with pacman or the install script.
Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via AUR.
But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there?
I've checked both packages, then i've also checked virtualbox
documentation. Documentation is available at
http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/
* Ch8.36. VBoxManage extpack *
The extpack command allows you to add or remove VirtualBox extension
packs, as described in Section 1.5, “Installing VirtualBox and extension
packs”.
In regards of VirtualBox docs, Seblu is installing extension pack the
proper way.
Mozilla provides a tarball named firefox-31.0.tar.bz2. We could make pacman
install that, then use the install script to extract the package and run
install.sh. No?
What upstream recommends is a way that should work on all distribution,
ignoring the distribution's tools. I do not think this is the way to follow if
we can get it better. Files in /usr should be tracked by pacman, with some
really rare exceptions only. In my opinion virtualbox or its dependencies are
not.
Your package isn't following upstream way to install extension package and
you are not sure it will keep working, you are just lucky.
I can update my package whenever upstream changes how things work. So what?
Packages are modified all the time.
Your package is only a duplicated package of seblu's one, only differing on
the way to install extension pack files isn't a good reason enough. Seblu
was right to remove your package, there was an explanation before
suppressing, rules were followed.
Nothing more to say.
I do not agree.
This is pretty stupid. My package does not hurt anybody and a lot of people
do want to use it.
--
main(a){char*c=/*Schoene Gruesse */B?IJj;MEH
CX:;,b;for(a/*Chris get my mail address:*/=0;b=c[a++];)
putchar(b-1/(/* gcc -o sig sig.c ./sig*/b/42*2-3)*42);}
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] [Bulk] Re: virtualbox-extension-pack vs. virtualbox-ext-oracle
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 08:25 +0200, Christian Hesse wrote: I do not agree. This is pretty stupid. My package does not hurt anybody and a lot of people do want to use it. It does offend the Arch Linux policy. I asked to downgrade VBox for the repositories, assumed a bug I experience should be an issue for others too, done at general mailing list after reporting the bug. Comment by Sébastien Luttringer (seblu)-Monday,04 August 2014,22:53 GMT You could try to remove the oracle extension or install it correctly, without the underground way of virtualbox-extension-pack. That could help to remove the extension from the equation. In both case, the issue seems to not be package related and you should report that upstream. - https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/41424 IOW, if there's a bug caused by upstream's current version, that makes the software useless, Arch will provide broken software by the official repositories. The reason why I often heard from Debian users, that for their needs Arch isn't stable enough. IMO Arch is much more stable, than Debian is, but indeed, a few packages from time to time are very annoying and on my machine those packages are always the same packages. The IgnorePkg line for my /etc/pacman.conf is very long and some of those packages are listed there (not all of them), because I experienced several times that the versions provided by the repositories are broken. Other packages are completely removed from my machine, especially those with a completely ignorant upstream. Virtualbox is one of those packages listed in the IgnorePkg line for a very long time. And no, I don't report each bug for each software, I only report quasi all bugs for audio production software, this already is very time consuming. If I find some time, I will use another virtual machine and remove VBox. That's the freedom we users have got. For maintainers of packages that don't fit to Arch's policy, perhaps somebody does provide an open private repository. While I dislike arch's policy sometimes, it can be completely bad, since Arch still is the best distro for my needs, so I'll live with the few things I dislike.
[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 4 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 18 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) == * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (18 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * arm-none-eabi-gdb-7.8-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * arm-none-eabi-gdb-7.8-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. bpiotrowski - 2 signoffs 2. anatolik - 1 signoffs
Re: [aur-general] Compiz package naming
Personally, I think 0.8 is better because Compiz 0.8 is still fairly widely used so it might not be fair to call it legacy. That said, it doesn't matter to me too much as I don't really have anything to do with Compiz 0.8. Regarding maintainers, these are the people that need to be contacted and their relevant packages: - hazard - ccsm - MilanKnizek - compizcc - FlorianD - compiz-bcop, compiz-backend-kconfig4, compizconfig-python, simple-ccsm - martadinata666 - compiz-core, compiz-fusion-plugins-main compiz-fusion-plugins-extra - flexiondotorg - compiz-core-mate, compiz-decorator-gtk - JesusMcCloud - compiz-fusion-plugins-main-genie - leafonsword - compiz-fusion-plugins-unsupported - DasMoeh - libcompizconfig I don't if it's better to leave comments on the relevant packages or send these folks an email telling them to join this conversation - hopefully they're all at least subscribed to aur-general! I'm also wondering about emerald. We currently have a package called emerald - maintained by martadinata666 - which is the 0.8 version. We also have emerald0.9 and emerald-git - both maintained by me - and both of which are 0.9 versions. Now if the Compiz 0.8 packages are getting renamed then presumably emerald should be renamed to emerald-legacy or emerald0.8 and possibly my emerald0.9 package should be renamed to emerald. Thoughts? On 5 August 2014 01:49, Rob McCathie korr...@gmail.com wrote: ...and did we decide if we're using -legacy or 0.8 in the names of the legacy 0.8 series packages? I can make all new 0.8 packages with the changes, submit them, make the merge requests, then disown them (and the original maintainers can take them back, or whatever), if it makes things easier. -- Regards, Rob McCathie On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote: The merger has taken place for both packages. On 4 August 2014 14:31, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote: Ok folks. As there have been no comments over the weekend I've uploaded compiz and compiz-bzr: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compiz/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compiz-bzr/ I've filed requests that compiz-core-devel be merged with compiz and compiz-core-bzr be merged with compiz-bzr. Regards On 1 August 2014 15:04, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote: @/dev/rs0 Understood. I'll happily take over maintenance. It makes sense to have the two packages standardised. @all If alucryd or anyone else doesn't raise any objections by Monday then I'll upload compiz and compiz-bzr and request compiz-core-devel and compiz-core-bzr be merged into them. Is that acceptable for everybody? Regards On 31 July 2014 20:49, Colin Robinson beardedlinuxg...@gmail.com wrote: I totally agree with you. I was just pointing out why the packages are named the way they are. Please change them unless alucryd wants to weigh in on the discussion. On 07/31/2014 08:36 PM, Rob McCathie wrote: Guess i'll stop bottom posting when everyone else is top posting :P On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:20 AM, Colin Robinson beardedlinuxg...@gmail.com wrote: Comment by alucryd 2014-04-02 07:25 beardedlinuxgeek: Wrong, the latest stable branch is 0.8.x, the 0.9.x branch is unstable. This is simply incorrect, as i've explained earlier. Comment by alucryd 2014-04-01 08:1 Merged a few bzr packages into this one. Could you upload it as 'compiz-core-bzr', all other distros use the 'compiz-core' name. I'll do the merge afterwards. Meh. Upstream doesn't recognise the concept of compiz-core since the 0.9 series. Do we comply with upstream or do we comply with other distros? Methinks upstream. Sidenote: http://www.paradoxcomputers.com.au/arch/packages/compiz-0. 9.11.2-1.src.tar.gz After some things were noticed and some discussion had in the compiz-core-bzr comments, this package has been updated and anyone reviewing it should re-download it. -- Regards, Rob McCathie Comment by beardedlinuxgeek 2014-04-02 07:39 This package isn't compiz-core. It's compiz-core + all the plugins + ccsm + the gtk decorator + the kde decorator. Take a look at the components (http://releases.compiz.org/components/), compiz-core is just one of 17 packages. This package, on the other hand, is all of them --- So obviously I support korrode's new naming scheme of changing things back to how they were originally named. It doesn't matter to me if you rename compiz-core to compiz-legacy-core or compiz0.8-core, but the word core needs to be dropped from all the 0.9x packages. On 07/31/2014 06:40 PM, /dev/rs0 wrote: Hi Charles, I think it makes more sense for you to take over my package. As I mentioned, it's basically a derivative of the bzr package. I do enjoy maintaining packages but I figured, as the bzr package receives
Re: [aur-general] Inactive TU -- Federico Cinelli
On Sat, 02 Aug 2014 at 12:44:53, Lukas Fleischer wrote: [...] Let the discussion period begin, the voting period will start on 2014-08-05. [...] The discussion period is over. Please cast your votes [1]. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=76
Re: [aur-general] Compiz package naming
On 5 August 2014 14:11, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote: Personally, I think 0.8 is better because Compiz 0.8 is still fairly widely used so it might not be fair to call it legacy. That said, it doesn't matter to me too much as I don't really have anything to do with Compiz 0.8. Regarding maintainers, these are the people that need to be contacted and their relevant packages: - hazard - ccsm - MilanKnizek - compizcc - FlorianD - compiz-bcop, compiz-backend-kconfig4, compizconfig-python, simple-ccsm - martadinata666 - compiz-core, compiz-fusion-plugins-main compiz-fusion-plugins-extra - flexiondotorg - compiz-core-mate, compiz-decorator-gtk - JesusMcCloud - compiz-fusion-plugins-main-genie - leafonsword - compiz-fusion-plugins-unsupported - DasMoeh - libcompizconfig I don't if it's better to leave comments on the relevant packages or send these folks an email telling them to join this conversation - hopefully they're all at least subscribed to aur-general! I'm also wondering about emerald. We currently have a package called emerald - maintained by martadinata666 - which is the 0.8 version. We also have emerald0.9 and emerald-git - both maintained by me - and both of which are 0.9 versions. Now if the Compiz 0.8 packages are getting renamed then presumably emerald should be renamed to emerald-legacy or emerald0.8 and possibly my emerald0.9 package should be renamed to emerald. Thoughts? On 5 August 2014 01:49, Rob McCathie korr...@gmail.com wrote: ...and did we decide if we're using -legacy or 0.8 in the names of the legacy 0.8 series packages? I can make all new 0.8 packages with the changes, submit them, make the merge requests, then disown them (and the original maintainers can take them back, or whatever), if it makes things easier. -- Regards, Rob McCathie On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote: The merger has taken place for both packages. On 4 August 2014 14:31, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote: Ok folks. As there have been no comments over the weekend I've uploaded compiz and compiz-bzr: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compiz/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compiz-bzr/ I've filed requests that compiz-core-devel be merged with compiz and compiz-core-bzr be merged with compiz-bzr. Regards On 1 August 2014 15:04, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote: @/dev/rs0 Understood. I'll happily take over maintenance. It makes sense to have the two packages standardised. @all If alucryd or anyone else doesn't raise any objections by Monday then I'll upload compiz and compiz-bzr and request compiz-core-devel and compiz-core-bzr be merged into them. Is that acceptable for everybody? Regards On 31 July 2014 20:49, Colin Robinson beardedlinuxg...@gmail.com wrote: I totally agree with you. I was just pointing out why the packages are named the way they are. Please change them unless alucryd wants to weigh in on the discussion. On 07/31/2014 08:36 PM, Rob McCathie wrote: Guess i'll stop bottom posting when everyone else is top posting :P On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:20 AM, Colin Robinson beardedlinuxg...@gmail.com wrote: Comment by alucryd 2014-04-02 07:25 beardedlinuxgeek: Wrong, the latest stable branch is 0.8.x, the 0.9.x branch is unstable. This is simply incorrect, as i've explained earlier. Comment by alucryd 2014-04-01 08:1 Merged a few bzr packages into this one. Could you upload it as 'compiz-core-bzr', all other distros use the 'compiz-core' name. I'll do the merge afterwards. Meh. Upstream doesn't recognise the concept of compiz-core since the 0.9 series. Do we comply with upstream or do we comply with other distros? Methinks upstream. Sidenote: http://www.paradoxcomputers.com.au/arch/packages/compiz-0. 9.11.2-1.src.tar.gz After some things were noticed and some discussion had in the compiz-core-bzr comments, this package has been updated and anyone reviewing it should re-download it. -- Regards, Rob McCathie Comment by beardedlinuxgeek 2014-04-02 07:39 This package isn't compiz-core. It's compiz-core + all the plugins + ccsm + the gtk decorator + the kde decorator. Take a look at the components (http://releases.compiz.org/components/), compiz-core is just one of 17 packages. This package, on the other hand, is all of them --- So obviously I support korrode's new naming scheme of changing things back to how they were originally named. It doesn't matter to me if you rename compiz-core to compiz-legacy-core or compiz0.8-core, but the word core needs to be dropped from all the 0.9x packages. On 07/31/2014 06:40 PM, /dev/rs0 wrote: Hi Charles,
Re: [aur-general] ArchLinux TU Application: Fabio Castelli (Muflone)
2014. 07. 31, csütörtök keltezéssel 05.25-kor Balló György ezt írta: 2014. 07. 31, csütörtök keltezéssel 01.06-kor Muflone ezt írta: Hi everyone My name's Fabio Castelli (aka Muflone) from Italy and I wish to apply to become a TU for ArchLinux to maintain some packages in the community repository. My TU sponsor is György Balló. I actually work as a software developer in a local private company and I use GNU/Linux since the 1998, having started with Slackware 2.0. Many years have passed through Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu and finally ArchLinux that actually I use daily at home and at my job place since a couple of years. Debian is still often used for software packaging, to deploy services in my network and for less experienced colleagues that needs some GNU/Linux environment in my job place. My experience in development is long term, starting in '80s with C=64 Basic, actually I work daily in Python (under Windows, GNU/Linux and i5/OS, both desktop, server and web platforms), Delphi and VB (under Windows), RPG/400 and CL (under i5/OS) and many other things which I use less often, like C or J2EE. My open source contributions are a really long list but let's try to not be boring: - maintainer for over 160 packages in the AUR, most of them updated often: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?SeB=mK=Muflone https://github.com/muflone/pkgbuilds/ - maintainer for some Debian packages: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mufl...@vbsimple.net https://alioth.debian.org/projects/python-apps/ - author of various open source softwares: http://www.muflone.com/english.html https://github.com/muflone/ https://code.google.com/u/102825094329389897213/ https://www.openhub.net/accounts/Muflone - written hundreds of articles for an Italian website around VB6 development through the 1998 and 2004: http://www.vbsimple.net/ - written hundreds of articles for an Italian website around Ubuntu through the 2009 and the 2011: http://ubuntrucchi.wordpress.com/ - support in the Italian Ubuntu forum, I was the second most active member of the forum through the 2009 and the 2012: http://forum.ubuntu-it.org/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofileu=73229 - support and founder of LQH (Linux Quality Help), an Italian GNU/Linux forum where normal users could ask their questions and only the experts group could offer support, resulting in higher quality service, ran only from highly experienced users through the 2009 and the 2012: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.linuxqualityhelp.it/supporto - written tenth of Italian video guides around PyGTK development through the 2008 and the 2010: http://pygtk.wordpress.com/ - written a couple of articles around GNOME Shell in the 2011: http://gnomeshell.wordpress.com/ - could continue but better stopping here.. too boring. I'm sorry! ArchLinux is actually my favorite GNU/Linux distributions and I think I could do a lot of work in enhancing this great distribution. What I love about ArchLinux is the perfect control it gives to me and it needs from me. Every time I need some software, I package it and then I publish it under AUR. I try to apply an old Microsoft rule: Never ever write the same thing twice, so if the software resulted useful to me then it could be useful for other users and AUR is a perfect place where to find stuff. There are a lot of packages that I wish to move in the community repository: hfsprogs, kompozer, sweethome3d, gmtp, arista, spyder/spyder3, sbackup, gwakeonlan, gespeaker, remmina-plugin-*, python-ptrace. There are also packages maintained from other users that I wish to see in community repository: dex2jar, dmg2img, firefox-theme-adwaita and thunderbird-theme-adwaita, gigolo, gscan2pdf, httrack, linkchecker, loggedfs, netactview, pacmanlogviewer, parallel-python, pyrenamer. I read daily the AUR general and AUR requests mailing lists but I never participate in the discussions, after many years of discussions in other ML and forums I lost the pleasure in writing stuff inside the communities. The same applies to IRC, too much time spent in helping others (I was also HelpOp in #irchelp) forced me to away even from IRC. My job coincided with my favorite hobby so, apart my personal projects (see GitHub) I love reading heavy books (technical, development, sysadmin, networking but also theater or classic novels) and watching films when the TV is not owned by my gf. Thank you for reading up to here. Best regards Fabio Castelli / Muflone I'm confirming my sponsorship. I think that Fabio has great experience, and has excellent packages in AUR. A discussion period of 5 days has been started now. -- György Balló Trusted User The discussion period is over, and the voting period is started now. Please vote: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=77 -- György Balló
[aur-general] Mailing list posting style (was: Compiz package naming)
Hi, Disclaimer: I'm trying to write this as friendly as possible, but I want to get the point across so please excuse slightly harsh wording and the length of the mail. Please understand that this mail is directed to all list members, not only those who participated in the thread on aur-general. It happens every now and then, but this thread is probably one of the worse ones. I know it's sometimes easy to forget, but a 16 level deep quote with 420+ lines of quoted content and about 6 lines of original content is not, by any stretch of imagination, okay. Please do not quote the entire thread in every reply and do not reply above the quote(s). A general rule of thumb is to quote only what's necessary to understand the reply. If you need context, please use bottom-posting or IMHO better yet interleaved quoting[1] (I also suggest to read the entire page) and limit your quote to as few lines as possible/necessary. Also feel free to summarise the original mails or write your reply in such a way that it can be understood without context which means that you can omit the quote entirely. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style Please also be aware that some mail clients will add line breaks after 80 characters and original text is normally wrapped after ~72 which means you get about 4 levels of quoting until text starts wrapping which makes it very hard to read. Generally, if your reply is shorter than the quoted message you might do something wrong. If you quote the entire message you likely do something wrong. If you quote the entire thread for 16 levels you *really* do something very wrong, no exception here, sorry. Also if you need any proof try to read this message[2] without reading the original messages directly (only read the quotes in the linked message). Note that the start of the thread is somewhere in the middle (you can search for Hello AUR general Compiz package maintainers) thanks to top/bottom/interleaved quoting styles being mixed. [2] https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2014-August/029292.html I'm also sending this to arch-general as a reminder because I've seen a few topposters/fullquoters there as well. Let's please all work together here so something like this doesn't happen again. If you see this happening in a thread that you participate in, please speak up (early) and make sure your own reply breaks the chain. Thanks for your consideration, Florian signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] Mailing list posting style (was: Compiz package naming)
Since I only ignored the original thread sent to AUR general and no other thread, I only reply to AUR. I agree with Florian. For those who guess somebody misquotes, there still are the mailing list archives, so don't worry that I don't like Bananas in Pyjamas. by bad quoting becomes I [snip] like Pyjamas. Sometimes people guess that the summarized quotes don't reflect the original opinion. Indeed, this seldom happens, but there are still the archives for clarification, IOW there's no need to quote trillions of lines and/or (multiple) copies of signatures.
Re: [aur-general] Mailing list posting style (was: Compiz package naming)
PS: http://tammihurly.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/20120814-113230.jpg
Re: [aur-general] Mailing list posting style (was: Compiz package naming)
+1 I also wanted to contribute to this thread. To quote the whole internet: I wouldn't fit into this email. Cheers! mar77i
[aur-general] Moving opensc from community to AUR
Hello, I'm not using opensc anymore, is there a Dev/Tu interested by taking care of it? I will move it to AUR if nobody is interested. Cheers, -- Sébastien Seblu Luttringer https://seblu.net | Twitter: @seblu42 GPG: 0x2072D77A signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU resignation.
On 04/08/2014 18:41, Peter Lewis wrote: ... Thanks for you early support. Good road buddy! -- Sébastien Seblu Luttringer https://seblu.net | Twitter: @seblu42 GPG: 0x2072D77A signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] no LLDP tools in [extra] or [community] :-/
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Sébastien Luttringer se...@seblu.net wrote: On 04/08/2014 17:39, Ido Rosen wrote: On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Sébastien Luttringer se...@seblu.net wrote: On 23/07/2014 23:35, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: On 23/07/2014 15:59, Ido Rosen wrote: That's fair, thank you for packaging lldpd! I noticed RedHat no longer seems to package ladvd, and has switched to lldpad. Maybe we should package lldpad (aka Open-LLDP) from http://www.open-lldp.org/ ? Thoughts? Background: - Last release one year ago (not so RERO) - Last commit un May 2014 (good) - The software is not in AUR. (nobody seems to have interest) I get all LLDP info (even proprietary protocols) with lldpd and the soft is well maintained. Although I would be happy to see him in community, I do not feel the need to maintain both. Do you see a technical reason to get both? Well put. I see no technical reason other than RHEL compatibility, which isn't enough on its own. Lldpd is working great, btw. :) Regards, -- Sébastien Seblu Luttringer https://seblu.net | Twitter: @seblu42 GPG: 0x2072D77A
