Re: [aur-general] Please remove pulseaudio-ubuntu
On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 16:42 -0400, Dany Martineau wrote: > Hi! > > I've just created pulseaudio-ubuntu, but it's a mess. Could someone can > remove it please? > Out of curiosity, what patches does ubuntu apply that are so desirable? AFAIK the Ubuntu pulse maintainers (2 of them I think) forwards everything they do upstream, and Lennart/Colin aren't very slow in pulling to git.
Re: [aur-general] Please remove pulseaudio-ubuntu
On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 20:34 -0400, Dany Martineau wrote: > Le 2010-06-05 19:12, Ng Oon-Ee a écrit : > > On Sat, 2010-06-05 at 16:42 -0400, Dany Martineau wrote: > > > >> Hi! > >> > >> I've just created pulseaudio-ubuntu, but it's a mess. Could someone can > >> remove it please? > >> > >> > > Out of curiosity, what patches does ubuntu apply that are so desirable? > > AFAIK the Ubuntu pulse maintainers (2 of them I think) forwards > > everything they do upstream, and Lennart/Colin aren't very slow in > > pulling to git. > > > I do have a strange bug (audio stops and replaced by a strident noise) > with pulseaudio who bug me and it happens only sometimes when i don't > want it to happen :-( . I was only testing pulseaudio with patches > from other distro by curiosity to try to avoid this bug. As i say, it > happens only sometimes with random apps (flashplayer, rhythmbox, amarok, > some games,...) and to stop the sound, i have to restart pulseaudio. > > Maybe it's related to /etc/asound.conf, maybe not. > > Anyway; since i have sime time to kill today (raining day), it was only > curiosity that led me to this package. I'd recommend pulseaudio-git, if that doesn't help go to the pulse ML and post a question. Actually, going there first is a good idea, bring your error logs from a pulseaudio -v run. P.S. - Please don't top-post. Fixed for you.
Re: [aur-general] Voting period: Thomas Dziedzic(td123)
On Sat, 2010-06-19 at 03:15 +0200, Andrea Scarpino wrote: > On Saturday 19 June 2010 02:48:00 Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > Thanks for the warm welcome! > Hi, welcome aboard. > > Seem that you have not a bbs and flyspray account. Or I am wrong? > I do recall seeing 'td123' posting in the bbs though.
Re: [aur-general] "tower-girls", was Re: TU application for Sven-Hendrik Haase
On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 20:57 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > On 24.06.2010 19:48, Isaac Dupree wrote: > > On 06/24/10 11:10, Daenyth Blank wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:05, Sven-Hendrik Haase > >> wrote: > >>> Is it true that the secret TU tower is where all the girls are kept? > >> Don't talk about that on the public list!!! > > > > methinks there are some women on this list. Thus, *all* the "girls" > > are certainly not "kept" "there"! > > > I suspect of all the places a girl could stumble upon in the net, this > one is the least likely to be it. Could I vote for Sven-Hendrik's application to be considered the best of all time (or at least June 2010)? Ditto on the 'least likely'. With the possible exception of Slackware's internal mailing list. Or are they still using usenet groups?
Re: [aur-general] "tower-girls", was Re: TU application for Sven-Hendrik Haase
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 17:47 -0400, Andrew Antle wrote: > > > > I've always been quite proud that the free / open source software > > world has > > projects like these: > > > > http://women.debian.org/home/ > > http://community.kde.org/KDE_Women > > http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWomen > > > > I know the comments were just supposed to be a bit of fun, but > > perhaps they > > highlight that something like wouldn't be a bad idea in Arch too. > > > > Pete. > > Patches welcome :) , preferably from women actually involved in Arch, > not pseudo-politically-correct males trying to make themselves feel > better. +1000. I haven't actually seen any females on the forum/IRC/mailing list (though to be fair names from some cultures are androgynous to my eyes). Recently on this list someone posted up linuxTag photos, there were more signs of Microsoft than women in those pics. I think this conversation has exhausted its lifetime though to be fair. Back to the TU application!
[aur-general] Please delete package
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32505 is an out-of-date/no-maintainer duplicate of http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=16170 Both packages provide pidgin-sipe, identical source, almost identical PKGBUILDs.
Re: [aur-general] packages up for adoption..
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:50 AM, M Rawash wrote: > - syncevolution: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19876 > - genesis-sync: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19880 > > somebody already offered to adopt this one, but apparently got a cold > feet; it's somewhat popular, so maybe a brave TU can move it to > [community]: > - planeshift: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=6563 > > thank you. > > I'm taking syncevolultion and genesis-sync as I'm using them.
Re: [aur-general] [arch-dev-public] Python-3.x transition with python-2.7 update
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 10:51 +0200, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote: > On 6 July 2010 10:19, Isaac Dupree wrote: > > On 07/06/10 01:57, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote: > >> > >> Hello Allan, > >> I know that I'm just a regular user but I'd like to express my opinion > >> too. I think the transition should be done when most modules and > >> applications support Python 3. I'd not be surprised if the transition > >> of majority of modules would take several years. By that time there > >> may be a way how to do a dual rename. > > > > Hi Lukas, > > Can you present a technical reason against doing the renaming now? Because > > as far as I can see, Allan has worked out the kinks and it will actually not > > harm you as a regular user at all... > > > > (unless you write personal scripts in python that you want to work with > > #!something on multiple distros? (then you probably want to run them in > > python version 2) .. I'm not sure I can think of an easy way to do that; > > maybe for each distro you use you could put a symlink in > > /usr/local/bin/python2 for example.) > > > > -Isaac > > > > Hi Isaac, > I don't write Python scripts but yeah, I think this is a real problem. > The other problem is that there are not many users of python 3 out > there. > > In a more subjective way I think whenever something is set as default > it should be the one which has most users (in both terms of people and > software). > > Lukas As another user (who doesn't write Python), I'd state that 'majority usage' is a pretty poor guideline for users of a Linux distro, and a relatively small one at that. I'm all for the option which reduces workload on the packagers. Of course if things break big-time then it may be a problem, but that's what [testing] is for, and those of us using it should know what to do if/when breakage occurs.
[aur-general] Davmail duplicates
Hi, davmail http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=33809 is the correct package, there's two more orphaned packages:- davmail-i686 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29085 davmail-x86_64 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29086 First package supersedes both the 2nd and 3rd.
Re: [aur-general] Why is there no option to delete your own package in AUR yourself?
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 08:58 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > > I think it would be better to just have a "delete request" button which > would require a note why the package needs deleted so that the TUs could > have a list they can easily access and work through. > > Allan > A much better idea. For quick response we could just mail aur-general directly (those of us who use it). Simplest solution would probably send an email to [aur-general] with the comments posted and giving the user's logged-in email address. Perhaps it should be a 'delete/disown request' button instead, and allowed for all package rather than just your own. Or 'delete' when its your own and 'disown' when its not.
Re: [aur-general] Why is there no option to delete your own package in AUR yourself?
On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 16:46 -0700, Dave wrote: > On 07/14/2010 04:41 PM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 08:58 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > >> I think it would be better to just have a "delete request" button which > >> would require a note why the package needs deleted so that the TUs could > >> have a list they can easily access and work through. > >> > >> Allan > >> > > A much better idea. For quick response we could just mail aur-general > > directly (those of us who use it). > > > > Simplest solution would probably send an email to [aur-general] with the > > comments posted and giving the user's logged-in email address. Perhaps > > it should be a 'delete/disown request' button instead, and allowed for > > all package rather than just your own. Or 'delete' when its your own and > > 'disown' when its not. > > For "disowns", I think the owner should also be e-mails so that he may > appeal the request. > > Dave Well yes, I was assuming that the current owner would be informed automatically. In any case, whenever a reporter does not state explicitly that "I emailed X a week ago with no reply" the TUs typically ask him to do so first, so I don't see any difference with how things are previously even if the current owner is not automatically informed.
Re: [aur-general] trusted users business
On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 00:12 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > On 16.07.2010 00:08, Ranguvar wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:40, Isaac Dupree > > wrote: > >> On 07/15/10 12:57, Angel Velásquez wrote: > >>> Quoting the TU Bylaws Quote section: > >>> > >>> "This section deals with quorums, and the consequences for those that > >>> repeatedly keep the group from meeting them. > >>> > >>> Quorums were established to make sure that all TUs are having a say in > >>> the matters that they vote on, and to ensure that TUs remain active in > >>> the job that they have taken on. All active TUs should be > >>> participating in discussions and voting procedures in order to > >>> continue meeting the quorums. > >>> **For this reason, active TUs that keep quorum from being established > >>> on a voting procedure for three consecutive voting procedures (they > >>> need not be on the same motion) are automatically brought up for > >>> removal procedure, by reason of unwarranted inactivity. **" > >>> > >>> ...So IMO we should start a removalprocedure... > >> AFAICT, no vote-quorums have actually failed to be established in recent > >> history, so the above automatic-removal (**For this reason...**) clause > >> does > >> not apply. (The general activity-guidelines found above it might, though.) > >> > >> -Isaac > >> > > I apologize for not voting in the past several TU elections. > > I've been a little distracted from Arch TU duties, but resolve to pay > > more attention to the mailing list in the future. > > Currently I'm on vacation in California, but I'll be back in New York > > in about a week. > > At that time I'll also be looking at the possibility of moving one of > > my AUR packages into [community], as I still don't have any on the > > repo (mostly because the majority of them are repackages, unsuitable > > for binary distribution, etc.). > > > > Thanks, > > Ranguvar > > [Devin Cofer] > > > I would be very delighted to see bin32-wine moving into community. If > you can package all the lib32 packages it depends on you will a) be able > to do that b) have some packages that make good community candidates > anyway (lib32 stuff). Also, why can't you do it while on vacation? > Surely you have your SSH tunnel, right? :) > > -- Lord Sven-Hendrik "Svenstaro" Haase I second the bin32-wine thing =). For it to be useful though I think lib32-all-graphic-drivers need to be available?
[aur-general] bin32-wine and related [WAS: trusted users business]
On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 02:25 +0300, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > On 07/16/2010 02:15 AM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 00:12 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > >>> > >> I would be very delighted to see bin32-wine moving into community. If > >> you can package all the lib32 packages it depends on you will a) be able > >> to do that b) have some packages that make good community candidates > >> anyway (lib32 stuff). Also, why can't you do it while on vacation? > >> Surely you have your SSH tunnel, right? :) > >> > >> -- Lord Sven-Hendrik "Svenstaro" Haase > > > > I second the bin32-wine thing =). For it to be useful though I think > > lib32-all-graphic-drivers need to be available? > > > > no. only lib32-libgl and lib32-nvidia-utils, which already are in > community. > > lets stick in the future in $subject and start another thread if you > feel you need to add something about packaging :D > Your wish is my command. Okay now that I have your answer I understand my assumptions were mistaken, only the libgl/nvidia-utils packages are 'app-facing' in that sense. A nagging question that I've been having in the back of my mind, how similar is Arch's lib32 stuff with the multi-lib stuff other distros (random example Ubuntu since that's my previous experience) do. When I first started using Arch I set a chroot up for my wine/skype/google-earth on the understanding that lib32 would always be 'unofficial', but recently I've seen more lib32 packages making it to [community]. Would lib32 make Arch multi-lib, then?
Re: [aur-general] bin32-wine and related [WAS: trusted users business]
On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 10:44 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 16/07/10 09:52, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > > > > lib32 packages are just a hack to run i686 packages on x86_64. to call > > arch a multilib we need first to have a multilib toolchain. > > > > Which is unlikely to ever happen... > > I think all this lib32 stuff is crap. Chroots are the way to go and are > so much cleaner. > > Allan I differ to your wisdom =). This sounds exactly like what I surmised when I first searched out the running of 32-bit apps in 64-bit Arch. In this spirit of "chroots are better" shouldn't it be made easier to maintain a chroot? For example having a 'pacman32' or 'pacmanchroot' package (would simply call pacman with user-configurable chroot locations and has its own pacman.conf)? One of the more 'hassling' things about maintaining my chroot is having to update each chroot separately (yes I could script that, will get round to that someday). Note that I'm not talking about automating chroot creation (I think Xyne already has a package which does that by abusing the .install file), but simplifying chroot maintenance. And before you say it, yes, patches welcome =). Maybe in August I'll look into it.
Re: [aur-general] bin32-wine and related [WAS: trusted users business]
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Xyne wrote: > > I resent your characterization of my post_install function as abuse. > No .install files were harmed in the making of my arch32-light > package. :) Ah, I think I must have been taken a bit too literally here. I was actually quoting your own description of how arch32-light does its work =). I myself think its a good way to set up a chroot, and should probably be considered the 'canonical' way currently (if I'm not wrong, you basically automate most of the steps in the 32-bit chroot wiki). I was actually talking about a package/script to handle chroot maintenance generally, where your pacman32 is specific to the arch32-light package. Of course, having bauerbill handle that for me would be lovely =)
Re: [aur-general] [Deletion Request] xf86-input-keyboard-git and xf86-input-mouse-git.
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 21:08 +0200, speedvin wrote: > Hello! > Please delete below packages, because of those you can use packages from the > repository! > xf86-input-keyboard-git - http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19041 > xf86-input-mouse-git - http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19042 > Thanks! The fact that they're from a git repository means those using them would want the latest revision, not latest stable.
Re: [aur-general] Vala 0.9.4 and future versions
On Sun, 2010-08-01 at 16:13 +0200, Christer wrote: > Hi, > > Both vala-devel (0.9.2) and vala (0.8.1) is out of date and has been for a > long time now. Both packages have been flagged as Out of Date previously (I > cant seem to get information when it was done from the web page?). > > Version 0.9.4 came out a couple of days ago. > > I have added a PKGBUILD for 0.9.4 in the comments section of the vala-devel > package, and I would like to take over as the maintainer of this package if > the original maintainer no longer has the time or interest in it. > > Ionut Biru is the maintainer at the moment (ib...@archlinux.org). > > Kind regards, > Christer Nissen, Sweden The maintainer name is a dead giveaway I think, he's a TU who probably forgot to request that these packages be orphaned when dropping them from [community] to the AUR.
Re: [aur-general] masqmail 0.3 with no backward compatibility
On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 11:10 +0200, Matthias Matousek wrote: > Hello, > > I am currently maintaining the masqmail package in aur. masqmail is a > small mail transfer agent. Last week a new version 0.3.0 was released > which has no compatibility to the 0.2 branch. > The masqmail developer recommends users who already use masqmail to > stick with the 0.2 branch and new users to take the 0.3 branch. To make > that possible there needs to be a package for each branch in the aur. > I'm not sure how I should handle that. I was thinking about creating a > second package "masqmail-0.3" in addition to the currently existing > package "masqmail". I wasn't able to find anything about such issues in > the packaging guidelines. Are there any suggestions how this should be > handled? > > Thanks, > matou > As I understand, convention is to rename the old branch to masqmail-0.2 and update masqmail to 0.3. You could include a post-install file to inform users on updating that they may want to stick to masqmail-0.2 Alternatively (and this may be better) is to delete masqmail and create masqmail-0.2 (which replaces it) and masqmail-0.3. This of course would be a bit more future-proof if upstream is going to make releases like this often.
Re: [aur-general] masqmail 0.3 with no backward compatibility
On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 16:47 -0600, Gary Wright wrote: > In short, makepkg and pacman -U (which is basically what yaourt does) > don't care what it says in the replaces=() array. Best advice would > be to add masqmail (the old pkgname) into the conflicts() array of the > masqmail-0.2 PKGBUILD, and put a message up in the comments for > masqmail-0.2 advising users to remove the original masqmail package > before upgrading. If you add 'conflicts', you won't have to advise users to remove the original package. Why not just update the masqmail package to the latest 0.2 version (or just a pkgrel bump) and add a post-update/install message saying "this package will no longer be maintained, please choose between masqmail-0.2 and masqmail-0.3 to receive further updates.
Re: [aur-general] Please disown haskell-{funcmp, hopenssl, hsdns, hsemail, hsyslog}
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 16:04 +0200, Peter Simons wrote: > Well, when a Haskell package is obviously out-of-date on AUR and someone > offers to take over maintenance, then disown it and let that person > handle the package. That's the way it's done for everything else, and > the procedure seems to work fine. It's a mystery to me why the ArchLinux > team deviated from that procedure for Haskell packages in the first > place. > > Take care, > Peter Wasn't there a Haskell update script that automatically did the updating?
Re: [aur-general] Please disown haskell-{funcmp, hopenssl, hsdns, hsemail, hsyslog}
On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 18:50 +0200, Peter Simons wrote: > Hi Ng, > > > Wasn't there a Haskell update script that automatically did the > > updating? > > Take care, > Peter That's very clear, thanks. Concerning versioned dependencies, perhaps if haskell package had the version number post-pended to the package name. For example foo depends (haskell wise) on bar>=4, then just put a generic dependency on bar-4. Not a very perfect solution, though. In any case, looks like this all comes down to one man =).
[aur-general] Please delete cairo-dock-plug-ins-bzr
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35141 is a dup of http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30335 Please delete. Both refer to the same package, and one is maintained while the other is orphaned with zero votes.
Re: [aur-general] Update pidgin-gtalkinvisible
On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 22:25 +0300, Evangelos Foutras wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Nilesh Govindarajan > wrote: > > On 08/16/2010 11:39 PM, Evangelos Foutras wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 8:40 PM, Nilesh Govindarajan > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> This is to notify the PKGBUILD owner of pidgin-gtalkinvisible that the > >>> plugin has been updated at fahhem.com/pidgin > >>> Please update the md5sums() in the PKGBUILD. > >> > >> To notify the maintainer of an AUR package that a new version has been > >> released, please use the "Flag Out-of-date" button on the package's > >> page. > > > > That's what I was thinking of doing, but unfortunately, I forgot the > > password & the system doesn't seem to have an option for forgot password. > > > > I don't know where it vanished. > > I sent you a new password. The password reset feature has been > implemented in the Git repo of the AUR code, but it needs to be pushed > to the live site. I've flagged it out of date, since I have some interest in that plugin as well =)
Re: [aur-general] Remove AUR grub2-efi package
On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 09:51 +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 9:40 AM, KESHAV P.R. wrote: > > Please remove the grub2-efi package > > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34470 . I have uploaded > > grub2-efi-x64 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=39904 and > > grub2-efi-x86 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=39905 to > > replace it. I already informed grub2-efi maintainer "bardo" about the > > new packages and he has agreed for grub2-efi's removal. Thanks. > > > > and done. > > Ronald Small quibble, wouldn't grub2-efi-x86_64 and grub2-efi-x86 be more descriptive? Not sure if x64 is the suitable label
Re: [aur-general] TU request?
On Sat, 2010-08-21 at 02:53 -0500, Brad Fanella wrote: > Thank you both for that information. I should be posting an application with > a lot more (useful) information about my goals and such. And I had to figure > out about the presence of sarcasm in the Arch community the hard way - > around 1000 posts ago. > > Thanks, > Brad Only a 1000 posts? Meh, no wonder you haven't figured out bottom-posting (otherwise known as the scourge of the Internet) yet. And no, the Arch community doesn't have sarcasm at all.
Re: [aur-general] ardour-lv2
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 14:03 +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > Excerpts from Ty John (sand_man)'s message of 2010-08-23 13:53:51 +0200: > > On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 19:30 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > > > On 23 August 2010 19:25, Ty John (sand_man) wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 12:24 +0200, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > > > >> Excerpts from Ty John (sand_man)'s message of 2010-08-23 12:13:11 > > > >> +0200: > > > >> > I noticed this package is currently unmaintained. > > > >> > Can I adopt this? > > > >> > > > >> Please do so, if you think it's still needed. > > > >> I orphaned it because I lost interest in the program, but afaik in the > > > >> meantime there's hardly a difference between this package and the one > > > >> in > > > >> [extra]. > > > > > > > > I can't believe I didn't see the 'adopt' button. > > > > > > > > Yeah I wasn't sure if it's the same or not. Does the one in extra > > > > support lv2 plugins? It doesn't seem to be specifically compiled in the > > > > same way. > > > > I'll keep it updated for now. > > > > > > Yes, extra/ardour is compiled with LV2 support. The only difference > > > between the two different binaries would be whatever change is > > > influenced by having FFT_ANALYSIS. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD > > > > > > > I see. > > FFT is an audio visualisation tool. I guess this package probably > > shouldn't really be called -lv2 then. > > When I created it, the [extra] package wasn't built with lv2 support > (slv2 wasn't in [extra] either). It appeared sensible at the time, > because lv2 support was the major difference. \me goes to uninstall ardour-lv2 and update from extra =). Thanks, you're right, the lv2 support was the big difference. I recommend ardour-lv2 can be removed, since its not required anymore with [extra] having lv2 support.
Re: [aur-general] Moving vlc-pulse to [community]
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 07:53 +0200, Jan Steffens wrote: > I would like to move vlc-pulse into [community], to provide VLC with > native PulseAudio output. > > Are there any objections? I'd like that =). It would be a separate package still, wouldn't it?
[aur-general] Claws-mail-notification
Hi, http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18285 is an older version (badly named) of http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=28037 I suggest first pacakge (notification_plugin) be deleted.
[aur-general] lib32-libstdc++5?
Hi all, Just realized http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=11191 is orphaned, and that there's quite a few comments below specifying exactly how to update it. Considering how many packages depend on it, I'm surprised its orphaned, but when I checked the PKGBUILD its a well-recognized name. Should I just adopt this package to update it and orphan it? Or is it more polite to wait for Pierre since I think its his package based on the name there. Or does the orphan indicate he doesn't want this package anymore? Thanks. Ng Oon-Ee
Re: [aur-general] lib32-libstdc++5?
On Sat, 2010-08-28 at 03:38 +0200, Jan Steffens wrote: > 2010/8/28 Ng Oon-Ee : > > Should I just adopt this package to update it and orphan it? Or is it > > more polite to wait for Pierre since I think its his package based on > > the name there. Or does the orphan indicate he doesn't want this package > > anymore? > > An orphaned package is orphaned. > If you can help, by all means go for it. Hi Jan, I see you've got libstdc++5 in [extra]. I'll patch up the PKGBUILD, but would lib32-libstdc++5 be under consideration for [multilib]?
Re: [aur-general] Welcome our newest TU, Lukas Jirkovsky (stativ)!
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 13:22 +0200, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote: > On 1 September 2010 10:43, Thorsten Töpper wrote: > > Do you prefer tea or coffee? > > > > Certainly coffee. Wrong answer. Its tacos!
Re: [aur-general] Status of community cleanup 2010.
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 18:07 -0500, Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > > I think we should drop emerald-themes, I haven't followed compiz dev, > > but emerald-themes hasn't been updated since 2007 (or any new code in > > git since then) > > > > Another reason to drop it (conversation in #compiz) > > 2010-09-01 18:03:30 coz_td123, if you want more emerald themes you > should probaby go to gnome-look.org and download them > 2010-09-01 18:03:46 td123 coz_: I'm more interested in the status, I > don't use it :) > 2010-09-01 18:03:57 td123 coz_: why would anyone want to use it > 2010-09-01 18:04:30 coz_td123, :) well it does have a few nice > options but it is essentially badly coded ... I believe someone tried > to rewrited in for compiz ++ but I have not tired it > 2010-09-01 18:04:45 soreau td123: No one has worked on it for a long > time now and it isnt supported at all officially > 2010-09-01 18:04:56 soreau It just happens to still work > 2010-09-01 18:05:07 coz_td123, a long while back ...a new decorator > was discussed for about 15 minutes :) > 2010-09-01 18:05:40 coz_td123, but right now gtk window decorator > and kde4 window decorator are essentially all there is > 2010-09-01 18:05:52 td123 ok, thanks :) >From a user's perspective, Emerald themes may be badly coded, but they're just so much NICER than gtk-window-decorator themes =). Its going to be a moot point though, once compiz++ comes out. I've switched to gtk-window-decorator already since I've been testing that on and off. So yes, I use emerald-themes personally but based on various sources it IS deprecated.
Re: [aur-general] voting period: Brad Fanella
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:43 -0500, Christopher Brannon wrote: > Christopher Brannon writes: > > > This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's > > application to become a trusted user. > > Votes: > yes = 14, > no = 2, > abstain = 5. Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed to get the majority of yes votes? Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday.
Re: [aur-general] voting period: Brad Fanella
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 20:10 -0500, Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > 2010/9/2 Ng Oon-Ee : > > On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:43 -0500, Christopher Brannon wrote: > >> Christopher Brannon writes: > >> > >> > This message marks the beginning of the voting period for Brad Fanella's > >> > application to become a trusted user. > >> > >> Votes: > >> yes = 14, > >> no = 2, > >> abstain = 5. > > > > Out of curiosity, has anyone who's reached the voting period ever failed > > to get the majority of yes votes? > > > > Just a 'historical'-type query, idle curiosity on a holiday. > > > > > > There was a guy that recently tried to help out as a TU, but he needed > more experience and know-how, he wasn't lacking in motivation or cause > though. > He didn't officially apply though. Well yes I remember that guy. I was more wondering about whether a vote has failed before.
Re: [aur-general] How do I
On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 10:42 +, Xyne wrote: > On 2010-09-05 10:57 +0300 (35:7) > Ionuț Bîru wrote: > > > On 09/05/2010 09:32 AM, vlad wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 12:43:03AM -0500, Nathan O wrote: > > >> How do I find somebody that will sponsor me? > > > I'll sponsor you. > > > > > > > i don't recall you being a TU > > Maybe he's a Trolling User. The bylaws are full of loopholes! :P I'd like a sponsor to be a Trolling User, it seems fun =)
Re: [aur-general] Question about patches in [community]
On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 21:03 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: > On Sun 05 Sep 2010 22:49 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > > Arch TUs are generally considered to be the ultimate nightmare of any > > upstream maintainer. We come in the night, nagging with patches until > > all known upstream problems are fixed. > > > > Do not stop trying to get your patches into upstream. > > Hell yeah! > Sven-Hendrik's post should be plastered on the wall of every TU (and Arch user, actually) =) Any objections to putting the quote in its entirety on the wiki for TUs?
Re: [aur-general] deleted package?
On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 16:07 +0200, Heiko Baums wrote: > Am Mon, 06 Sep 2010 10:03:28 +0200 > schrieb Hervé Cauwelier : > > > Thanks, I'll install flashplugin-native64. > > I'd suggest first reading the package description: > "... [WARNING!!! known security vulnerabilities]" > > flashplugin-native64 is an old and outdated version which has several > security issues as also discussed on the Arch mailing lists. > > You'd better install flashplugin from [multilib] if you really need > flash. > > Btw., I'm not sure if it is not better to remove the package > flashplugin-native64 from AUR due to these vulnerabilities. > > Heiko I think Arch users should be well-informed enough to make the decision for themselves. Its not like flashblock and the like are rocket-science, after all, and some people do have issues with nspluginwrapper (that was one of the reasons I was so happy when Adobe first came out with 64-bit flashplugin).
Re: [aur-general] Question about patches in [community]
On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 10:11 -0500, Brad Fanella wrote: > 2010/9/6 Sven-Hendrik Haase > > > On 06.09.2010 08:42, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > > On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 21:03 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: > > >> On Sun 05 Sep 2010 22:49 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > > >>> Arch TUs are generally considered to be the ultimate nightmare > of any > > >>> upstream maintainer. We come in the night, nagging with patches > until > > >>> all known upstream problems are fixed. > > >>> > > >>> Do not stop trying to get your patches into upstream. > > >> Hell yeah! > > >> > > > Sven-Hendrik's post should be plastered on the wall of every TU > (and > > > Arch user, actually) =) > > > > > > Any objections to putting the quote in its entirety on the wiki > for TUs? > > > > > > > > None at all. :) > > > > I was actually planning on making that my forum signature! :-P > However, that > is crucial information and needs to be included in the wiki. Done. May need polishing =) http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#The_TU.27s_mission_statement
Re: [aur-general] Question about patches in [community]
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 08:17 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > 2010/9/6 Ng Oon-Ee : > > On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 10:11 -0500, Brad Fanella wrote: > >> 2010/9/6 Sven-Hendrik Haase > >> > >> > On 06.09.2010 08:42, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > >> > > On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 21:03 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: > >> > >> On Sun 05 Sep 2010 22:49 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > >> > >>> Arch TUs are generally considered to be the ultimate nightmare > >> of any > >> > >>> upstream maintainer. We come in the night, nagging with patches > >> until > >> > >>> all known upstream problems are fixed. > >> > >>> > >> > >>> Do not stop trying to get your patches into upstream. > >> > >> Hell yeah! > >> > >> > >> > > Sven-Hendrik's post should be plastered on the wall of every TU > >> (and > >> > > Arch user, actually) =) > >> > > > >> > > Any objections to putting the quote in its entirety on the wiki > >> for TUs? > >> > > > >> > > > >> > None at all. :) > >> > > >> > >> I was actually planning on making that my forum signature! :-P > >> However, that > >> is crucial information and needs to be included in the wiki. > > > > Done. May need polishing =) > > > > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#The_TU.27s_mission_statement > > Sorry, but however awesome Sven is, that kind of content does not fit > in that page. I have slightly changed the wording of the introductory > paragraph for the "desired effect"; see wiki diff. Understood =). The comment is still awesome though. Would it be acceptable for 'communicating with and sending patches upstream as needed' to contain a link to the ML post?
Re: [aur-general] Question about patches in [community]
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 10:17 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > 2010/9/7 Ng Oon-Ee : > > On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 08:17 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > >> 2010/9/6 Ng Oon-Ee : > >> > On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 10:11 -0500, Brad Fanella wrote: > >> >> 2010/9/6 Sven-Hendrik Haase > >> >> > >> >> > On 06.09.2010 08:42, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > >> >> > > On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 21:03 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: > >> >> > >> On Sun 05 Sep 2010 22:49 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > >> >> > >>> Arch TUs are generally considered to be the ultimate nightmare > >> >> of any > >> >> > >>> upstream maintainer. We come in the night, nagging with patches > >> >> until > >> >> > >>> all known upstream problems are fixed. > >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> Do not stop trying to get your patches into upstream. > >> >> > >> Hell yeah! > >> >> > >> > >> >> > > Sven-Hendrik's post should be plastered on the wall of every TU > >> >> (and > >> >> > > Arch user, actually) =) > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Any objections to putting the quote in its entirety on the wiki > >> >> for TUs? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > None at all. :) > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> I was actually planning on making that my forum signature! :-P > >> >> However, that > >> >> is crucial information and needs to be included in the wiki. > >> > > >> > Done. May need polishing =) > >> > > >> > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#The_TU.27s_mission_statement > >> > >> Sorry, but however awesome Sven is, that kind of content does not fit > >> in that page. I have slightly changed the wording of the introductory > >> paragraph for the "desired effect"; see wiki diff. > > > > Understood =). The comment is still awesome though. Would it be > > acceptable for 'communicating with and sending patches upstream as > > needed' to contain a link to the ML post? > > Sure. In fact, since there are no other examples I can recall for the > sake of citation, that _was_ my intention (which somehow skipped my > keyboard). Done. There seems to be a spacing issue on my browser after the link, is that standard?
Re: [aur-general] multilib
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 22:03 +0200, Xyne wrote: > > Don't get me wrong, I wasn't accusing you or your package of anything. Not > > sure what happened except those problems that came out of no where. > > Don't worry, I didn't take it that way at all. I just wanted to clarify for > anyone else following the thread so they don't walk away thinking that > arch32-light might be dangerous. ;) But arch32-light ate my babies =)
Re: [aur-general] what is the best way to resolve conflicting files in aur packages?
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 09:53 +0200, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:
> On 8 September 2010 22:00, Alex Combas wrote:
> > What is the best way to resolve conflicting files in aur packages?
> >
> > I've run into this issue a couple times recently, first of all with
> > "panda3d-cvs" and "cuda-toolkit" both contained the file /usr/bin/bin2c
> >
> > The result was the panda3d-cvs maintainer just removed the file since he
> > said it wasn't doing anything anyway.
> >
> > Now I've run into a similar problem but this time the maintainer fixed it a
> > different way and it broke my package.
> >
> > opencl-headers http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35367 has 3 files
> > which are also provided by nvidia-utils
> >
> > So now to fix it the maintainer of opencl-headers has added
> > conflicts=(nvidia-utils) to his package.
> >
> > But my problem is that I recently made a package (luxrays-hg) which
> > depends=('nvidia-utils') and also makedepends=('opencl-headers')
> >
> > So my package (luxrays-hg) will no longer install because 2 of
> > its decencies (opencl-headers & nvidia-utils) are in conflict.
> >
> > So what is the best practice in this situation?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Alex Combas
> > goplexian.com
> >
>
> Hello Alex,
> as Jonathan said the best thing would be to wait for a new driver
> release with openCL headers removed.
>
> By the way I tried to use the headers supplied with nvidia-utils but
> compilation fails with them. I was able to build luxrays-hg with
> forcing opencl-headers to install (headers from nvidia-utils are
> overwritten then). Maybe you can post a note to the package comments
> that the users should force the installation of opencl-headers until
> there is a new nvidia-utils in the repo.
Nvidia's beta release has shifted some headers (not sure if they're
these specific ones) out of the driver.
Re: [aur-general] The Arch Way
On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 10:16 -0500, Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Christoph wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have just adopted the package xmind > > (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=22394) because the former > > maintainer > > disowned it, and I am not shure which is the best way to build the package. > > > > There are three possibilities: > > > > 1) Building from source > > 2) Building from the "Portable" zip-file (see > > http://www.xmind.net/downloads/) > > 3) Building from the deb-files provided for Debian/Ubuntu (see > > http://www.xmind.net/downloads/) > > > > ad 1) > > This is what you would usually do, but according to > > http://groups.google.com/group/xmind-dev/browse_thread/thread/d68d0c8f30b4b42c > > the eclipse ide would be a prerequisite, so that would need a very large > > download if you do not already have installed eclipse (nearly 170 MB for > > eclipse plus 10 MB for the xmind source code!) > > > > ad 2) > > This was the way the former maintainer went. Download size: 75 MB > > The portable zip-file contains both the 32-bit and the 64-bit versions, so > > the > > PKGBUILD just had to copy the right files. > > > > ad 3) > > When I proposed (a year ago) to use the deb-files instead in order to have > > smaller downloads (each of them, 32-bit and the 64-bit has appr. 36 MB), the > > maintainer told me that this would be ugly and "not the Arch way", that he > > would not do such a thing. When I told him that I did not get the point of > > it, > > since the zip file equally just installed ready-built binaries, he did not > > respond to it. > > > > I still think that using the deb-files would - in this special case - be the > > best option. But of course I would never dare to deviate from "the Arch way" > > (since it is the way to world domination, as we all know ;-)). > > > > What do you think? > > > > Christoph > > > > I always prefer a package build from source, but if it's provided in a > portable zip, that is a valid option in this instance. I would say go > with option 2. > > Cheers! It looks like in this case the content of the portable zip is identicaly (just about) to the content of the deb, just that the debs are arch-specific. I'd think its simpler to just go with option 3. Its surprising that any project REQUIRES eclipse to build though, eclipse can generate makefiles which can be shipped with source
Re: [aur-general] The Arch Way
On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 19:22 +0200, Ulf Winkelvos wrote: > On 10.09.2010 19:07, Christoph wrote: > > On Friday, 10 September 2010, 17:40:35 Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > >> It looks like in this case the content of the portable zip is identicaly > >> (just about) to the content of the deb, just that the debs are > >> arch-specific. > > > > That describes the situation very well. Moreover, the debs contain a > > .desktop > > and a .png file, whereas the zip file does not, and the zip version looks > > for > > the configuration file in some sub-sub-subfolder, not in /etc. > > > > Christoph > > > You should consider option 4, like Philipp suggested, until then i don't > see how option 2 should be any better than option 3. > > Ulf You mean besides the fact that 'debs are evil-er than zips'? Something about that 'data' folder is really bad =)
Re: [aur-general] packages deletion request
On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 11:01 -0500, Brad Fanella wrote: > On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 10:05:35AM -0600, jwbirdsong wrote: > > On 09/12/2010 07:17 AM, Xavier D. wrote: > > > > 1st-ly I'd like to apologize to the OP, the following comments are NOT > > directed just at you but more as an open mail to community. > > > > There seems to be a recent trend to request deletion of (to use OP > > phrasing) orphans, out-of-date and not updated for over a year. > > > > It seems this makes them PERFECT candidates for adoption and/or > > abandonment-adoption as opposed to deletion. The few I viewed in the > > list all seemed to have source available. > > > > Deletion criteria include (but not limited to) no sources and duplicates > > of AUR/community or other repo packages. > > > > Just my bitchin' to put in my 2 cents > > Agreed. I also feel this way towards [community]. If a project has been ended > and the source is still available, then I see no reason to remove it from > [community]. > > It's just one of those things that I never understood. One additional criteria - if it doesn't build anymore (for ended projects it happens after a while).
Re: [aur-general] AUR - 'kernel26' search results
On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 02:22 +0200, Ulf Winkelvos wrote: > > all requests are send to the mailing list. So TUs still have full > control, but ist pretty handy for users that are not on the ml. If they're not on the ML, a mechanism should be added for reporters to give reasons why packages should be disowned or removed. For some cases discussion will also be done here on the ML, would the reporter than not be part of the discussion?
Re: [aur-general] Orphaning request - chromium-beta and clamav-devel
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 17:38 -0500, Brad Fanella wrote: > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Ray Rashif wrote: > > On 24 September 2010 05:34, Brad Fanella wrote: > >> I don't think what I'm saying here is being clearly understood. :-( > > > > Sorry, I missed the whole Det business. All in all, that kind of > > contribution (what Det appears to be doing) is not encouraged, but it > > _is_ somewhat of a contribution. From the way I see it, he's just a > > concerned party, preemptive about the fate of a particular package. > > > > > > It's fine. :-) I just wanted someone to confirm my sanity! > > Note to readers: This is not implying that help on the AUR is not > appriciated; rather, if you are going to update a package multiple > times, please adopt it to make life easier. And use orphan requests as > a last resort! > > Thanks, > Brad This is where 'multiple owners' of a package would be useful (I know its already been discussed a week ago). Besides the maintainer assigning a secondary maintainer, some maintainers could perhaps be given to option to say, in effect, "anyone interested can be my second maintainer", but that person's maintainership does not affect the maintainership of the first maintainer. Or something like that...
Re: [aur-general] GUI
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 10:00 +0200, Heiko Baums wrote: > Am Tue, 5 Oct 2010 01:12:06 -0500 > schrieb Nathan O : > > > Probably not allowed to do so, but I figured I would ask. In a > > PKGBUILD can we do something like: > > > > echo "Do you want to enable GTK support?" > > read gtk > > > > if [[ "gtk" == "yes" ]]; then > > ./configure --with-gtk > > > > and so on. > > > > Thanks > > Build two packages or a split package as soon as AUR has support for > them: > package-cli > package-gtk > > See e.g. avidemux-cli, avidemux-gtk and avidemux-qt or cdrdao and > gcdmaster. > > Interactive PKGBUILDs or PKGBUILDs with "dynamic" dependencies are not > recommended. > > Heiko Best suggestion so far =)
[aur-general] Delete request: nvidia-beta-ice-rt
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30371 nvidia-beta-ice-rt My package, initially created it for the RT-variant of kernel26-ice. Forgot all about it because I subsequently created and still use nvidia-beta-all. Doubt anyone is using this package, since as it is it would not work at all (version is woefully out of date compared to nvidia-utils-beta which it depends on ). Please delete.
Re: [aur-general] Delete request: nvidia-beta-ice-rt
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 12:16 +0300, Evangelos Foutras wrote: > 2010/10/5 Ng Oon-Ee : > > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30371 > > > > nvidia-beta-ice-rt > > > > My package, initially created it for the RT-variant of kernel26-ice. > > Forgot all about it because I subsequently created and still use > > nvidia-beta-all. Doubt anyone is using this package, since as it is it > > would not work at all (version is woefully out of date compared to > > nvidia-utils-beta which it depends on ). > > > > Please delete. > > Done. Thanks
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Lukas Fleischer
On Sun, 2010-10-10 at 21:27 +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > (I'd also like to see xwax in [community] but sadly, it's not really > popular), pytyle, optionally surf and tabbed and maybe some of the > OpenSync stuff (I'm still trying to get it work with calcurse and my > Symbian phone). Wasn't it the case that in most cases the TUs can bring stuff to [community] as they see fit, even if its not got very many votes? Obviously for 'normal' packages, not 2 GB ones =)
[aur-general] Libreoffice in AUR
I just noticed that libreoffice-new has been uploaded. Contrary to the last post in https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=105664 the old libreoffice in the AUR has not yet (to my searching) been deleted (I think its been reuploaded). Obviously, its exactly the same. I wonder what the point is of having libreoffice-new though. It's basically just extracting of some rpms, as compared to the libreoffice from [testing]. I propose that libreoffice[1] and libreoffice-new[2] be deleted. The author should reupload as libreoffice-bin. If a TU agrees, I volunteer to email the author. [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41792 [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41793
[aur-general] Please delete offlineimap-idle-git
Source no longer exists, it was merged into offlineimap back some time ago (and subsequently deleted for causing too many crashes). offlineimap itself is unfortunately unmaintained (but still working for now). http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30592
Re: [aur-general] Libreoffice in AUR
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 09:14 +0200, Stefan Husmann wrote: > Am 14.10.2010 08:42, schrieb Ng Oon-Ee: > > I just noticed that libreoffice-new has been uploaded. Contrary to the > > last post in https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=105664 the old > > libreoffice in the AUR has not yet (to my searching) been deleted (I > > think its been reuploaded). Obviously, its exactly the same. > > > > I wonder what the point is of having libreoffice-new though. It's > > basically just extracting of some rpms, as compared to the libreoffice > > from [testing]. > > > > I propose that libreoffice[1] and libreoffice-new[2] be deleted. The > > author should reupload as libreoffice-bin. If a TU agrees, I volunteer > > to email the author. > > > > [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41792 > > [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41793 > > > > > Hello, > > I deleted libreoffice again because of the name clash. But in the past > we allowed binary versions or beta versions of some projects, so why not > doing here? > > I would not recommend its usage, but let people decide. > > Regards Stefan I was just thinking the name is misleading, and -bin is a better name.
[aur-general] Please delete xmacro-patched
There's currently xmacro [1] and xmacro-patched [2] in the AUR. Both do the same thing, and even generate identical binaries. xmacro-patched should therefore be deleted. [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=15191 [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=27245
Re: [aur-general] Request for Removal: python2-oggconvert
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 22:20 -0400, Andrew M. Kluger wrote: > Thank you kindly. Is this procedure documented anywhere? http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR#Q:_Foo_in_AUR_is_outdated.3B_what_do_I_do.3F
Re: [aur-general] New Trusted User: Lukas Fleischer
On Sun, 2010-10-24 at 18:42 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > On 24.10.2010 18:04, Jakob Gruber wrote: > > On 10/24/2010 05:53 PM, Peter Lewis wrote: > >> On Sunday 24 October 2010 at 15:04 Loui Chang wrote: > >>> With 21 yes, 0 no, and 4 abstains out of 27 active members, we > >>> have a 92.5% quorum and a new Trusted User! > >> Wooo! Congratulations Lukas! > > > > My condolences Lukas :D > > > I actually wanted to put a witty response here but instead I decided to > indirectly congratulate Lukas. I also wanted to indirectly state that he > may sit right next to me on my TU-couch. > Urgh... the imagery.
Re: [aur-general] Welcome our newest TU, Kaiting Chen!
On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 21:27 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 10/11/10 21:15, Xyne wrote: > > Xyne wrote: > > > >> Ok, 5 days have passed. TUs, please cast your votes: > >> > >> http://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=41 > >> > > > > The voting period is over. (Sorry for the delayed announcement.) > > > > Yes: 12 > > No: 5 > > Abstain: 6 > > Total: 23 > > > > Out of 28 TUs, 28% percent have participated and quorum has been > > established. > > The application is thereby accepted. > > > > 28% is not a quorum! :P Dammit Allan, I was about the say the same thing!
Re: [aur-general] Fwd: Lib32 and Bin32 pkgs
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 22:46 +0200, jesse jaara wrote: > I think we should start a campaign for > converting the lib32 and bit32 pkgs to > new multilib compliant format. > So instead if downloading the 32bit > version from the i686 repos build > the package from source whit -m32 > and gcc-multilib. Is there a need for a campaign? Just leave a message on the comments.
Re: [aur-general] [community] repository cleanup
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 22:25 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 16/11/10 22:06, Heiko Baums wrote: > > Otherwise you should write a big note on the homepage and/or the > > download page that this distro is free but not meant to be used for the > > public. "Feel free to use it but don't expect anything. This distro is > > only meant to be used by us developers." Or something like this. Maybe > > a bit exaggerated. > > Slightly exaggerated. But perhaps we do need that to keep people from > forming such unfounded ideas about their opinions counting towards > anything around here. > > Allan I thought this idea of Heiko's was a great idea, myself. In a fit of inspiration, here's a suggestion. This would be placed after the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph in the 3-paragraph description. "This community involvement allows developers to focus on what's most important to them in the knowledge that the community will provide high quality packages for everything else." Just a draft, doesn't really express everything yet. Should I open a bug-report? And Heiko, I'm not sure why you're making a big fuss over these packages. Its not even much harder to work from the AUR. Comparisons to Gentoo are ridiculous. I've got 75 packages from the AUR currently, and I don't spend hours a day compiling. The longest package to compile is probably samba4 at 20 minutes, followed by the kernel at 10 minutes (optimized), everything else tops out at 1-2 minutes. Go have a cup of coffee, and consider the difference to the hours and hours you'd have spent compiling world on Gentoo.
Re: [aur-general] [community] repository cleanup
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 16:08 +0100, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > My point in short: > Arch is great as long most packages you need are binaries and only some > are from source. > If Arch requires you to build lots of packages from source it's the > worst of both worlds. Have you seen the list of software getting moved? I've only seen one person describe them collectively as 'many important' packages. Almost none of which I've heard of before, of course This thread started with the assertion that 'many important' packages are getting moved to the AUR. I believe this assertion to be false, as, obviously, do the devs. Historically from reading [arch-dev-public] the devs have been careful to continue maintaining packages none of them use if its seen as crucial to a large majority of users. None of the packages being moved fit these criteria. At all.
Re: [aur-general] [community] repository cleanup
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 16:27 +0100, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote: > On 16 November 2010 15:21, Sergej Pupykin wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I think there is no need to move orphaned package to AUR until it > > works and does not have critical/security bugs. > > > > +1. Why remove working packages? If unmaintained, then why not let someone who actually uses the package maintain it? Its not like the packages are gone forever. The exact same PKGBUILDs are now on the AUR, so you can still use the packages. Or update them if you're interested. The only 'loss' is to those who don't have a package installed, they'd now have to install something from the AUR. Big deal.
Re: [aur-general] [community] repository cleanup
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 18:28 +0100, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > Excerpts from Ng Oon-Ee's message of 2010-11-16 17:13:47 +0100: > > This thread started with the assertion that 'many important' packages > > are getting moved to the AUR. I believe this assertion to be false, as, > > obviously, do the devs. Historically from reading [arch-dev-public] the > > devs have been careful to continue maintaining packages none of them use > > if its seen as crucial to a large majority of users. None of the > > packages being moved fit these criteria. At all. > > I see your point. I looked through the [extra] -> [] list yesterday or > so and was a bit shocked at first until I saw that most of the packages > I considered important would be maintained in community. > > However, what I tried to point out is what would happen if a binary -> > source trend develops. No danger of that happening here. The devs use Arch, why would they move out stuff they consider important? And between them, what they consider important is probably almost everything in a 'base' install for the big distros (Ubuntu, Fedora etc.), because importance also depends on user-base. Higher user-base means its more likely a dev uses it =). > > One other thing: The lists are based on orphans. My impression was that > it's common practice among developers to adopt -> update -> orphan. > Based on this I wonder whether it's sensible to create lists of removal > candidates based on orphans. > I think that's only common practice for packages where noone really wants them, the initial dev has left/become inactive, so its in a state of limbo, but when devs have the time they look at the 'out-of-date' flag and help out.
Re: [aur-general] AUR Improvement Thread
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 23:17 -0500, Kaiting Chen wrote: > How can we make the AUR even better? I'll start: Won't comment on the others for now, but... > 2. User provided binaries (if case anyone wants to volunteer) (this should > probably be carefully controlled) No, if binaries are required it should be in [community]. It would also drastically increase bandwidth requirements (both up and down).
Re: [aur-general] AUR Improvement Thread
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 11:17 +0100, Cédric Girard wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Lukas Fleischer > wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:17:33PM -0500, Kaiting Chen wrote: > > > 1. Integrated distributed version control system > > > > Why would we need that? Keep it simple. People can setup their own repos > > if they want, just as I did [1]. > > > > > [SKIP] > > > > [1] http://git.cryptocrack.de/?p=archlinux-packages.git;a=summary > > > > This works only as long as the maintainer stay the same. This is really > different from an integrated, thus common, VCS. > Yes, as I understood the original post, the idea is that we have a history of changes in the PKGBUILD. Could be very useful.
Re: [aur-general] AUR Improvement Thread
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 15:53 -0500, Isaac Dupree wrote: > On 11/17/10 14:32, Kaiting Chen wrote: > > > > I really would like to see some sort of integrated VCS system though. It's > > easy to tell what a new release in the official repositories contains by > > using the SVN interface. No such thing exists for the AUR. > > +1. > > In fact, +2 because the AUR consists of relatively untrusted PKGBUILDs, > so it should definitely be easier for AUR users to see the changes. This is the best reasoning I've seen so far for implementing a VCS.
[aur-general] Please delete qtile dups
qtile-new-git http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=40921 bavardage-qtile-git http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23760 The first, package maintainer admitted he wrongly uploaded it, he currently maintains qtile-git The second, I have no idea where its from, but its circa 2009, references the same project webpage but a different source. Its uploaded by 'bavardage', who also owns that github branch... but no activity since early 2009
Re: [aur-general] Move pigeonhole to [community]?
On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 17:27 +, Peter Lewis wrote: > On Saturday 20 November 2010 17:22:34 Florian Pritz wrote: > > On 20.11.2010 17:56, Peter Lewis wrote: > > > So, the idea would be to keep dovecot in [community] > > > > dovecot is in extra. > > Yeah, dovecot is in extra, maintained by Andreas. Personally, I'd be even > happier for pigeonhole to go in there too and for the two to be built > together > each version bump, but I don't have that power :-) Just a user comment, it can get a bit frustrating when direct dependencies like these are in community/extra (different maintainers). vlc-pulse-plugin for example (though that's not a good example, its normally updated within 12 hours). Maintaining together is a win, from my perspective =)
[aur-general] Please resolve tap-plugins and tap-plugins-cvs
Hi, I just adopted tap-plugins[1], updated and cleaned it up. tap-plugins-cvs[2] should IN MY OPINION be deleted, it does not serve any purpose above tap-plugins (the description talks about bsb but the package does not actually provide it). The problem is that louderbox[3] depends on tap-plugins-cvs. How to resolve? Ideally I'd think [3] should depend on [1] and [2] deleted. I am cc-ing maintainer of [3] here. [1]http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=8361 [2]http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=20098 [3]http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=33604
Re: [aur-general] Please resolve tap-plugins and tap-plugins-cvs
On Sun, 2010-11-21 at 12:29 +0100, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > Excerpts from Ng Oon-Ee's message of 2010-11-21 11:41:02 +0100: > > Hi, I just adopted tap-plugins[1], updated and cleaned it up. > > tap-plugins-cvs[2] should IN MY OPINION be deleted, it does not serve > > any purpose above tap-plugins (the description talks about bsb but the > > package does not actually provide it). The problem is that louderbox[3] > > depends on tap-plugins-cvs. > > > > How to resolve? Ideally I'd think [3] should depend on [1] and [2] > > deleted. I am cc-ing maintainer of [3] here. > > > > [1]http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=8361 > > [2]http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=20098 > > [3]http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=33604 > > Maybe check whether louderbox really requires tap-plugins-cvs. Maybe > also check when the last commit to cvs was made and whether you can find > anything regarding bs2b (whatever that may be). > bs2b is a totally separate plugin, I have it using ladspa-bs2b. tap-plugins-cvs does not provide it, nor has it ever since I first used it (half a year back at least). I will await a reply from the maintainer of louderbox, thanks.
Re: [aur-general] Please resolve tap-plugins and tap-plugins-cvs
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 00:09 +0100, masutu wrote:
> Hi,
> i'm the maintainer of louderbox, don't really know, why i made this package
> depend on the cvs version of tap-plugins [2], works with [1] too. Changed
> the PKGBUILD. Btw, could you please fix the PKGBUILD of [1], it says
> "arch=('x86' 'x86_64')" where it should be "arch=('i686' 'x86_64')".
>
> Thanks,
> masutu
Hi masutu,
Thanks, made the change.
I presume from the other responses that tap-plugins-cvs should be left
as is?
Re: [aur-general] About BURG packages
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 23:04 +0200, H.Gökhan SARI wrote: > Hello, > There is a variety of burg-* packages on AUR: > > burg-bzr > > burg-bzr-fixed > > burg-emu-fixed > > burg-themes > > burg-themes-extras > > burg-themes-fixed > > > the packages with *-fixed postfix are the working ones (There is a thread > going on https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=100130). And the other > packages (the packages other than burg-themes-extras, I didn't test it) are > orphaned or not working -BTW, most of them aren't updated for a while-. I > suggest removing burg-bzr, burg-themes and renaming fixed packages as > deleted ones. > > And also, I'll test burg-themes-extras and let you know if it works. > > Thanks, If the packages without the -fixed postfix are orphaned why not just adopt them (or ask whoever maintaines *-fixed to adopt them. Any naming scheme with -fixed at the end doesn't make sense in the long run.
Re: [aur-general] [arch-dev-public] SDL and friends maintainer wanted
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 02:13 +0100, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > On 25.11.2010 15:47, Allan McRae wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am looking to stop maintaining SDL and related packages. These were > > some of the first packages I adopted when joining the dev team and I > > now really focus on other areas. Saying that, I do not think I have > > had to touch one of these packages in ages, so it will be a low > > maintenance burden for whoever takes it on (at least until SDL-1.4 is > > finally released). The packages to be taken are: > > > > SDL: > > sdl > > sdl_gfx > > sdl_image > > sdl_mixer > > sdl_net > > sdl_pango > > sdl_perl > > sdl_sound > > sdl_ttf > > smpeg > > > > Related libraries/dependencies: > > freealut > > freeglut > > ftgl > > libmikmod > > openal > > speex > > > > Games for testing: > > apricots > > frozen-bubble > > > > > > If no current developer wants to take these on, I can look at the > > active people in the Arch Games project for recruitment (some are TUs > > I think...). > > > > Allan > > > > I'd take them, though I'm only a lowly TU, unable to maintain packages > in [extra]! Oh, the shame! > > So, drop thy devine packages to [community] or else! > > -- Sven-Hendrik devine? divine? bovine? =)
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: Dave Reisner
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 03:14 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > On 11/30/2010 03:01 AM, Dave Reisner wrote: > > Greetings! > > > > Please consider this my application to become a Trusted User. My name is > > Dave Reisner, and I'm 27 years old, currently residing in the New York > > City area. Ionut Biru has graciously offered to sponsor this > > application. I'm a self-taught programmer, computer enthusiast, an > > occasional > > here is my official statement. > > lets start the discussion period > Isn't this sentence against the bylaws or something? I was under the impression the word 'begin' needs to be in there somewhere. With 1 or preferably more exclamation marks =)
Re: [aur-general] Delete request
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 06:00 +0100, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > On 01.12.2010 00:11, PyroPeter wrote: > > On 11/30/2010 11:51 PM, Seblu wrote: > >>> dune2 > >>> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=33037 > >>> Broken link, and this is non-free game. > >>> > >> In a general way, non-free game/soft is a valid argument? > > > > No. Afaik even the official repositorys contain non-free software. > > > Indeed, rms wouldn't be happy. Anyhow, if end up discussing the ethics > of non-free software we'll end up like Debian. Let's just let our users > choose what they want to use as long as providing the software isn't > illegal. Just to play devil's advocate, illegal according to which jurisdiction =)
Re: [aur-general] [Orphan Request] [pytyle2-hg]
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Xyne wrote: > Kaiting Chen wrote: > >> Done. --Kaiting. >> >> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Andrew Gallant wrote: >> >> > Hello, >> > >> > Could pytyle2-hg be orphaned? It can be found here: >> > >> > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42541 >> > >> > The current maintainer used a "10 Minute Mail" address, so he cannot be >> > reached. (I'm the developer of pytyle--I'll take over the package, as it is >> > currently broken.) >> > >> > Thanks! >> > - Andrew >> > > > > *digs out the top-poster beating-stick and eyes Kaiting menacingly* > *adding fuel to the fire* Hasn't he done that quite a few times before? =p
Re: [aur-general] TU application - Kyle Keen
On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 14:57 +0100, Cédric Girard wrote: > On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Allan McRae wrote: > > > On 03/12/10 23:35, Konstantinos Karantias wrote: > > > >> How can we vote? :) > >> > >> > > No-one who top-posts is allowed a vote. > > > > :D > > Wise decision ! > I'm bottom-posting, ergo I deserve a vote!
[aur-general] Non-native English speakers and the AUR by-laws [WAS: removal proposal for Ranguvar]
On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 07:22 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > On 5 December 2010 06:46, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > > we are all nerds and not layers and we are not in a judge curt to follow, > > bylaws letter by letter > > The bylaws are what empower us to act upon and make decisions - it's > not about following the laws word by word. Without them, we wouldn't > take ourselves seriously :) > > Granted, the wording can be a little too formal for non-English > speakers. Perhaps there should be some translations for it? That's my take on it as well. Translations would not end however, simplification may be better.
Re: [aur-general] Remember the rules for adding packages to [community]
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 19:16 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 06/12/10 18:41, Evangelos Foutras wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Allan McRae wrote: > >> So... I just noticed a package was added to [community] that I am certain > >> did not pass any of the criteria required for being added. > >> > >> When I looked in the AUR for that package less than a week ago as a > >> potential replacement for an old and unmaintained package in [core], it was > >> not even in the AUR...and I can find no evidence for it every being > >> added to the AUR in the time since. So it did not have 10 votes, it > >> definitely would not have 1% pkgstats usage. > > > > Are you talking about mailutils? It has been in [community] for over a year. > > > > Oops... how the hell did I miss that when I searched a week ago! > > Anyway, that was not the only package I was talking about, as I have > seen quite a few new packages entering the repo lately which have been > questionable additions. So it was more of a reminder to people to put a > bit of thought into what is added into the repos. > > Allan Good excuse, Allan =0
[aur-general] How were those packages created? [WAS: Tarball Guidelines]
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 14:47 -0500, keenerd wrote: > Here are some of my favorites. And some stats about what is in the AUR. > > -Kyle > http://kmkeen.com Point of curiosity, how were the listed packages created? Some things (like including icons) I can see, but things like .swp etc... doesn't everybody use makepkg --source?
Re: [aur-general] rxvt-unicode-256color has been deleted
On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 10:07 +0100, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > Excerpts from Thomas Dziedzic's message of 2010-12-10 05:01:35 +0100: > > rxvt-unicode in extra has 256 color support built with it which made > > the deleted package redundant. > > Thanks for the heads-up! > >From me as well. I'd have just kept the package forever if this wasn't informed (no easy way to find out that my packages don't exist on the AUR =) ).
Re: [aur-general] Remove ardour3-svn
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 20:43 -0200, Bernardo Barros wrote: > I wrote an comment there. You be useful to have a space to put that > kind of message on top in AUR website, don't you think? I will also > put a post_install message as you suggested. Top-posting ftw? A pre_install message would be good for this sort of thing. But then again that would just encourage the current behaviour (where people assume that the 'AUR' is just simply a backend to the various helpers). In this situation, the best thing would be a post_install message, of course
Re: [aur-general] Remove ardour3-svn
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:22 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > My view is that there is no need for informational post_install or > post_update messages (and I find those annoying in general...). > Especially given this obviously a svn snapshot for a branch that has > seen no release yet. I work on the assumption that the users of Arch > are not stupid[*] and know what they are installing on their systems. > They would have gone out of their way not to just install the ardour > package from the repos for a reason. > > [*] well, lets just say I do to make this point... :P > > Allan Well from the POV of ardour's developers, ardour3 isn't even alpha or pre-alpha yet, and this PKGBUILD just encourages those mythical 'stupid users' to try out something which isn't for general users yet. The problem here is that problems will be brought to them (the ardour devs) rather than to this list or the comments on the AUR package. If a post_install message alleviates that problem it's all good, I think.
[aur-general] Request delete of samba4-openchange
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41471 Reason: a duplicate of samba4 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=40043 Background: Previous maintainer created samba4-openchange because openchange relies on a specific version of samba4 but samba4 advanced beyond that version. This is no longer the case, and in addition there doesn't seem to be much use of samba4 currently except for openchange (this is also the case in Debian/Fedora).
Re: [aur-general] Remove ardour3-svn
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 18:33 +0100, Xyne wrote: > On 2010-12-21 15:55 +0100 (51:2) > Cédric Girard wrote: > > I know why you did it, even though I don't see why AUR PKGBUILDs content > > should be dictated by upstream devs. > > It's not being dictated by upstream devs. The dev has expressed concerns and > we're trying to address them out of respect. He has been neither rude nor > demanding from what I have seen, and a simple message is a completely > reasonable solution. +1 on this point, been following the LAU thread. Paul has expressed his opinion and been very civil about it, we should do the same IMO, it does not cost much.
[aur-general] Please orphan earcandy
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24059 Maintainer does not respond since Dec 9th
Re: [aur-general] Please delete lib32-libtiff4
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 11:06 +0100, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote: > On 24 December 2010 06:18, Xyne wrote: > > Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > > >> libtiff4 has both-arch support. > >> > >> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=28895 (supports both arch) > >> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=39656 (to be deleted) > >> > > > > Done, thanks. I also left a comment about an error in the "arch" array for > > libtiff4. > > > > I think it shouldn't have been deleted. From the name I guess it was > i686 library for use on 64bit Arch. libtiff4 doesn't provide 32b > library on x86_64 systems. Damn I missed that, sorry. Reuploaded and orphaned, cc-ing the original maintainer.
Re: [aur-general] VirtualBox in [community]
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 13:56 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: > In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to > the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2: > > virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) > virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) > virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) > > In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions. > > What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of > virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be > removed from [community] without moving it to AUR. virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest. > > And it would be nice if virtualbox-ext-oracle > (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44761) would be moved to > [community], too, so that virtualbox is completely in [community] with > all its features. Isn't there licensing issues with these? Or have those been resolved by Oracle?
Re: [aur-general] Breaking the unspoken rule: AUR helper in [community]
On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 10:34 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: > And the problem why those AUR wrappers are not moved to the repos is > not that AUR is probably insecure. Well, that's one reason, even if I > haven't seen one insecure package in AUR yet. The main reason is that > people shall and must first understand how ABS and AUR are working, > how the wrappers are working and how AUR and pacman can interact etc. > > So just keep it as it is and keep it simple. This way people have to > Btw., there is already an "AUR" for trusted packages. It's called > [community]. > > Heiko Two very true statements. From a user-perspective (full disclosure, I use bauerbill full-time), I feel the most important thing is that all Arch users should know how ABS, the AUR, and PKGBUILDs work. In fact yaourt should probably be excised from the wiki altogether (I've thought about it before but gotten lazy).
Re: [aur-general] TU Application -Thomas Hatch
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 12:41 -0700, Thomas S Hatch wrote: > Thanks Xyne :) > > On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Xyne wrote: > > > Thomas S Hatch wrote: > > > > > Hello, ArchLinux Tus > > > > > > Xyne has agreed to sponsor me as a TU. I am very excited at the potential > > > opportunity to become more directly involved with the development of > > > ArchLinux. > > > > /snip > > > > I have indeed agreed to sponsor Thomas, so here I am sponsoring. :) > > Let the discussion period begin! > > A top-poster! Burn him!
Re: [aur-general] delete request
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 17:01 -0700, Thomas S Hatch wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Brad Fanella wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Thomas S Hatch > > wrote: > > > 2011/1/10 Cédric Girard > > > > > >> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Brad Fanella < > > bradfane...@archlinux.us > > >> >wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Matthias Rascher > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > Hi, > > >> > > can somebody delete this packages... > > >> > > > > >> > > 1) obsolete > > >> > > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45068 > > >> > > the package name was changed (see package comment by chmurli) > > >> > > > > >> > > 2) duplicate > > >> > > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37238 > > >> > > the package is redundant (see package comment by alexwizard) > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > Done and done. Thank you. :-D > > >> > > > >> > Regards, > > >> > Brad > > >> > > > >> > > >> What was the name of these packages ? > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Cédric Girard > > >> > > > > > > Yes, brad just annihilated those packages in mere seconds, what were the > > > names? > > > > > > -Tom Hatch > > > > > > > Um...uh... > > > > I don't quite remember to be quite honest. I did verify that they were > > obsolete/duplicates, however, so I suppose there's no harm done. > > > > Heh, I am not worried about harm, just curious! > Congrats on being so fast on the draw! On a related note: don't you guys sleep/work/do-something-else-other-than-read-aur-general-mails? =)
Re: [aur-general] delete request
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 18:35 -0600, Brad Fanella wrote: > 2011/1/10 Ng Oon-Ee : > > On a related note: don't you guys > > sleep/work/do-something-else-other-than-read-aur-general-mails? =) > > > > > > Sleep? What is this "sleep" you speak of? Ah. I thought so =)
Re: [aur-general] delete request
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 20:40 +0100, Xyne wrote: > Evangelos Foutras wrote: > > > lol u mad bro > > Sorry, this isn't Archan. Could have fooled me.
[aur-general] Please delete syncevolution-bin
Maintainer of [1] request that [2] be used instead. [2] is the proper way to install syncevolution and use it. Please delete [1]. I asked the maintainer to request it himself but no reply in almost 2 weeks. [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38320 [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19876
[aur-general] Please delete evolution-added-plugins
I uploaded it [1] then realized it would be better to follow the way Debian packages it. For background, Gnome Evolution has some 'experimental' (read: unmaintained) plugins in its source which are not installed by default. Package [1] was my initial attempt to compile them, and was meant as a replacement for evolution in [extra]. I realized though that the Debian package was only a few kb (only containing the plugin), so I uploaded [2] which follows the same name as Debian/Ubuntu and only contains the plugin, with a versioned dependency on evolution. So in conclusion, [2] replaces and is better than [1], please delete [1] =) [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45345 [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45346
Re: [aur-general] Please delete evolution-added-plugins
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 08:44 +0200, Evangelos Foutras wrote: > 2011/1/13 Ng Oon-Ee : > > So in conclusion, [2] replaces and is better than [1], please delete [1] > > Deleted, thanks. Thanks for both
Re: [aur-general] Please delete ttf-ms-extrafonts
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 16:57 +0100, Stefan Husmann wrote: > Am 13.01.2011 16:00, schrieb Marcel Korpel: > > Hi everyone, > > > > Can someone please delete ttf-ms-extrafonts [1]; it has no maintainer > > and as mutlu_inek said in the comments his ttf-vista-fonts [2] > > provides the same fonts and has a more liberal license. > > > > Regards, > > Marcel > > > > [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35297 > > [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=10408 > > > > Done, thank you. Slight OT, thanks for pointing out this package, I now have more font compatibility than previously =)
Re: [aur-general] List for new package announcements?
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 18:55 +, Peter Lewis wrote: > Okay. Let's wait for a few more opinions - this wouldn't have to be just AUR > either. New stuff in the binary repos could be included too. > > Pete. There ARE no new packages in the binary repos =p. From what I've seen, everything starts life in the AUR (as an alpha/beta of something). Anything that goes into the binary repos is discussed on [arch-dev-public] first.
Re: [aur-general] mtr-cli (was: TU Application - Seblu)
On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 13:30 -0600, Brad Fanella wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:35 PM, dave reisner wrote: > > I hate to do this, but I have to play devil's advocate here. This is > > _exactly_ what's done for the vim/gvim package. The build directory is > > _literally_ copied and the same package is built twice with extra options. > > Why is it okay there but not here? > > > > /me dodges incoming flames > > > > dave > > > > No, no, you have an excellent point there. The vim/gvim split is an > strong example, and quite frankly, I don't see where a problem arises > in splitting the package. Perhaps vim has a much larger user base?
Re: [aur-general] [arch-general] Please settle 'base' in 'depends' for all
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 11:29 +0100, Elena ``of Valhalla'' wrote: > On 2011-01-19 at 08:30:14 -0500, Stéphane Gaudreault wrote: > > 1) There is a groupe of packages that are required. Theses packages are > > necessary for the proper functioning of the system (eg. a kernel, a boot > > loader, initscript, glibc, etc). The system will not run well or be usable > > without will be here. It is not necessary for other package to depends on > > them, because they **should** be there (although it does not hurt if a > > package > > depends on them). > > kernel and bootloader aren't really required e.g. in a chroot; > I don't think that such a list would include much beside glibc > and pacman with its dependencies (otherwise it wouldn't be arch) > That depends, if you're building (for example) external kernel modules the kernel would of course be required.
