Re: [aur-general] Package deletion: upc (or rename to gccupc)

2010-05-22 Thread Stefan Husmann
Am 22.05.2010 23:02, schrieb Eduardo Martins Lopes: Hello all, I uploaded a package with the wrong name, the package upc should be named gccupc for UPC is a programming language for which there are several compilers (gccupc is only one of it). I already corrected in my pkgbuild and therefore w

[aur-general] Package deletion: upc (or rename to gccupc)

2010-05-22 Thread Eduardo Martins Lopes
Hello all, I uploaded a package with the wrong name, the package upc should be named gccupc for UPC is a programming language for which there are several compilers (gccupc is only one of it). I already corrected in my pkgbuild and therefore would like to ask for the deletion of the previous on

Re: [aur-general] Please delete a package.

2010-05-22 Thread Evangelos Foutras
On 22/05/10 18:27, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote: Hello Please delete eglibc-2.11-svn [#1] that is replaced now by eglibc-2.12-svn [#2]. Thanks. [#1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32130 [#2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37370 Done.

[aur-general] Please delete a package.

2010-05-22 Thread Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
Hello Please delete eglibc-2.11-svn [#1] that is replaced now by eglibc-2.12-svn [#2]. Thanks. [#1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32130 [#2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37370 -- Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi \cos^2\alpha + \sin^2\alpha = 1

Re: [aur-general] community repo "cleanup"

2010-05-22 Thread Ionut Biru
On 05/22/2010 05:23 PM, Ionut Biru wrote: On 05/22/2010 04:58 PM, Allan McRae wrote: Hi, The TODO list has been created for this "rebuild". Obviously no rush on this one given it is not a real rebuild. And remember to consider whether the package really needs to stay in [community] given many h

Re: [aur-general] community repo "cleanup"

2010-05-22 Thread Allan McRae
On 23/05/10 00:37, Chris Brannon wrote: Allan McRae wrote: Given these packages are obviously not updated much, it would be good to give them a rebuild to get new packaging policies in place such as: *SNIP* - package() functions Hi, Should we always have a package() function? Are there s

Re: [aur-general] community repo "cleanup"

2010-05-22 Thread Ionut Biru
On 05/22/2010 05:28 PM, Xyne wrote: The TODO list has been created for this "rebuild". link? archlinux.org/login and then click on todos -- Ionut

Re: [aur-general] community repo "cleanup"

2010-05-22 Thread Chris Brannon
Allan McRae wrote: > Given these packages are obviously not updated much, it would be good to > give them a rebuild to get new packaging policies in place such as: *SNIP* > - package() functions Hi, Should we always have a package() function? Are there situations in which it is not appropriate

Re: [aur-general] community repo "cleanup"

2010-05-22 Thread Xyne
> The TODO list has been created for this "rebuild". link?

Re: [aur-general] community repo "cleanup"

2010-05-22 Thread Ionut Biru
On 05/22/2010 04:58 PM, Allan McRae wrote: Hi, The TODO list has been created for this "rebuild". Obviously no rush on this one given it is not a real rebuild. And remember to consider whether the package really needs to stay in [community] given many have not been updated in ages. Cheers, Alla

Re: [aur-general] community repo "cleanup"

2010-05-22 Thread Allan McRae
Hi, The TODO list has been created for this "rebuild". Obviously no rush on this one given it is not a real rebuild. And remember to consider whether the package really needs to stay in [community] given many have not been updated in ages. Cheers, Allan