On 31/05/12 01:58, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
Hi,
I've recently seen some comments in AUR, where a user points out that X
package works well on powerpc/arm.
I was wondering what's the general approach given to these architectures
on AUR; since AUR is unsupported, is it ok to add these
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 1 new package in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 143 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14
Hello all,
AnotherZero, the maintainer for byobu, has orphaned the package. I'm afraid
that I'm in the same boat as him, I don't really have time to do it (in my
case learn how to) myself. Is anyone else up for maintaining it? If not, I
will attempt to learn the skills necessary to get it
I would like to start getting into maintaning but I've never done it
before, that's why
I'm here watching the conversations and watching the builds progress.
Federico Cinelli @ 213.985.9643
CINELLI Motorsports LLC
CINELLI Thoughts @ http://www.CINELLIthoughts.com/
Stay true.
On 05/31/2012
And could it potentially lead to AUR packages uploaded without either
'i686' or 'x86_64' set?
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 09:38:05AM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
On 31/05/12 01:58, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
Hi,
I've recently seen some comments in AUR, where a user points out that X
package
On 31 May 2012 17:38, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:
When I first though about it, I wanted to say why not, it doesn't hurt
the functioning of the normal i686,x86_64 packages.
I thought the same, but after thinking more... While AUR is
unsupported, the project/site is still an official
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Phillip Smith li...@fukawi2.nl wrote:
I thought the same, but after thinking more... While AUR is
unsupported, the project/site is still an official item.
In my mind, it doesn't make sense to include unofficial platforms in
official infrastructure, supported
On 2012-05-31 08:10, Phillip Smith wrote:
On 31 May 2012 17:38, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:
When I first though about it, I wanted to say why not, it doesn't hurt
the functioning of the normal i686,x86_64 packages.
I thought the same, but after thinking more... While AUR is
Hello,
I messed up looking if the package already existed before uploading a
package I'd made, so now there's 2 packages for the game Frozen Synapse.
gadget3000's package [1] has 25 votes, has been around since last
September and has been flagged out of date for about a week. I haven't
contacted
Dinsdag 29 Mei 2012 om 04:30 (CEST +0200) schreef Federico Cinelli:
Have you guys been in touch with him yet? I'm sure someone else will
gladly take over the package if he's no longer interested
Federico Cinelli @ 213.985.9643
CINELLI Motorsports LLC
CINELLI Thoughts @
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Sid Karunaratne s...@karunaratne.net wrote:
Hello,
I messed up looking if the package already existed before uploading a
package I'd made, so now there's 2 packages for the game Frozen Synapse.
gadget3000's package [1] has 25 votes, has been around since last
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Christian Stadegaart
e-m...@bewust-leven.nl wrote:
I noticed that tlm created teamviewer-stable package since, in his opinion
Hilinus, the current maintainer of Teamviewer isn't doing a good job.
I removed tlm package. Everyone seems happy with the current
Donderdag 31 Mei 2012 om 22:45 (CEST +0200) schreef Seblu:
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Christian Stadegaart
e-m...@bewust-leven.nl wrote:
I noticed that tlm created teamviewer-stable package since, in his opinion
Hilinus, the current maintainer of Teamviewer isn't doing a good job.
I
good day,
please remove codelite-x86_64 [4] from aur (redundant). details below
from my chat with the maintainer.
regards,
nem
[4] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=56102
- Forwarded message from Richard Didier zep...@gmail.com -
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:49:56 +0200
From:
On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 01:03:51 +0200
n...@ikitten.co.uk wrote:
good day,
please remove codelite-x86_64 [4] from aur (redundant). details below
from my chat with the maintainer.
regards,
nem
Merged into codelite-bin [1] instead,
as it is assimilable in purpose.
codelite-bin is
On Thu 31 May 2012 09:56 -0300, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
On 2012-05-31 08:10, Phillip Smith wrote:
On 31 May 2012 17:38, Jelle van der Waa je...@vdwaa.nl wrote:
When I first though about it, I wanted to say why not, it doesn't hurt
the functioning of the normal i686,x86_64 packages.
16 matches
Mail list logo
