On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Carl Schaefer wrote:
> > On 1 June 2014 01:10, Steven Honeyman wrote:
> > > That's not the name of the software though.
>
> the upstream URL appears to disagree:
>
> Upstream URL: https://github.com/jessek/hashdeep
>
> > From the first line of the
> > > offici
> On 1 June 2014 01:10, Steven Honeyman wrote:
> > That's not the name of the software though.
the upstream URL appears to disagree:
Upstream URL: https://github.com/jessek/hashdeep
> From the first line of the
> > official readme file:
> >
> > "This is md5deep, a set of cross-platform tools
Just to add to that, it's named md5deep in every other linux distro,
for example:
It doesn't matter how they call it in other distros (example: [1]). Arch
Linux guideline is a project name becomes a package name. Since the
project name is md5deep, hashdeep should be deleted.
[1] https://bugs
Just to add to that, it's named md5deep in every other linux distro,
for example:
http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/m/md5deep/
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/repo/pkgs/md5deep/
http://software.opensuse.org/download.html?project=utilities&package=md5deep
On 1 June 2014 01:10, Steven Honey
That's not the name of the software though. From the first line of the
official readme file:
"This is md5deep, a set of cross-platform tools to computer hashes, or
message digests, for any number of files while optionally recursively
digging through the directory structure."
On 1 June 2014 00:59
I general user, but i think what hashdeep is more right name for
'Universal' tool set.
2014-06-01 2:33 GMT+03:00 Steven Honeyman :
> I've just noticed that the md5deep [1] package (kept up-to-date, first
> submitted in 2006) someone has duplicated to "hashdeep" [2] in 2014.
> They compile from exa
I've just noticed that the md5deep [1] package (kept up-to-date, first
submitted in 2006) someone has duplicated to "hashdeep" [2] in 2014.
They compile from exactly the same source, and produce the same
binaries.
Can the hashdeep package be removed?
Also, would anybody be interested in moving md5
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Tim Jester-Pfadt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think there might be a confusion regarding package [6].
>
> For our regular desktops we need the XOrg server which comes as a binary in
> /usr/bin/Xorg provided by the xorg-server package in [extra]. You get this
> by setting --e
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Lukas Fleischer
wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 at 14:03:00, artux wrote:
>> [...]
>> Suppose I want to move/merge a single pkgbuild to a split build, is that
>> possible? Will the pkgbase change, so the single pkgbuld will
>> "disappear" automatically? Or the other
The AUR package "l3afpad" is in need of an update as the source file
has changed URL and it will soon stop working when the author takes
his old page down. I'm willing to take over as maintainer for this
package if possible.
I already emailed the current maintainer, but he hasn't replied.
https:/
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Marcel Dopita wrote:
> The package jdownloader2 is outdated for more than 4 months now. Owner does
> not list his email so I wasn't able to contact him directly. Exactly two
> weeks ago I left a comment on AUR and also sent private message to user with
> same name
The package jdownloader2 is outdated for more than 4 months now. Owner
does not list his email so I wasn't able to contact him directly.
Exactly two weeks ago I left a comment on AUR and also sent private
message to user with same name on official jdownloader board. Both with
no response.
I'm
On 31/05/14 10:00 AM, Michael Kühn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the package https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/geoip-update/ does not to
> work as intended (see my comment) and there is no maintainer for it.
>
> I created a new package which should be more reliable:
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/geoi
Hi,
the package https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/geoip-update/ does not to
work as intended (see my comment) and there is no maintainer for it.
I created a new package which should be more reliable:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/geoip-update-systemd/
... and is also more in-sync with the
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:23 AM, Rob Til Freedmen <
rob.til.freed...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Maxime Gauduin wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Rob Til Freedmen <
> > rob.til.freed...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/faustworks/
>
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Allen Li wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm the maintainer for gvim-python. Can someone merge/delete it as
> there is now a package in [extra], gvim-python3?
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gvim-python/
> [2]: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Νῖκος Θεοδώρου wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Could you please delete (or merge)
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lib32-gstreamer0.10-good-plugins/
> and
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lib32-gstreamer0.10-ugly-plugins/ ,
> so I can update the split packages
> https
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Doug Newgard
wrote:
> Python bindings for ethumb were finally merged into the python-efl tree.
> This package has no more reason to exist. Nothing worth merging, so it just
> needs deleted.
>
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python2-ethumb/
>
> Thanks
> Doug (
Python bindings for ethumb were finally merged into the python-efl tree.
This package has no more reason to exist. Nothing worth merging, so it
just needs deleted.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python2-ethumb/
Thanks
Doug (Scimmia)
=== 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
* 5 packages missing signoffs
* 1 package older than 14 days
20 matches
Mail list logo
