Please merge my package deluge-git-stable[1] into
deluge-stable-git[2], didn't realize I was creating a duplicate.
Also, deluge-client-svn[3] should be deleted, as upstream switched to
git, the package doesn't build, is orphaned, uses $startdir and is
outdated.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packa
Someone please merge
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mikachanfont
into https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-mikachan
the package use $startdir and wrong package name
Regards
These AUR packages are duplicates of packages alreadu in the main repositories:
Busybox:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/busybox-static/
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/busybox/
Wine Gecko:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/wine-stable_gecko/
https://www.archlinux.org/pack
Correction: hashdeep was merged into md5deep. (Hashdeep doesn't exist
anymore, so I think that's what you meant to say?)
On 01/06, Steven Honeyman wrote:
What would be useful is a "Flag for deletion" button on the AUR. It
could (for example) only show up once a package has been flagged as
"out of date" for a month, and require a short reason why. It'd save
all these poor devs getting cluttered mailing lists, and wo
On 01/06, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
.. bummer.
Is that final as well?
J. Leclanche
Anything else would be pointless either way. makedepends are used when
building, not when packaging something, so in that case you'd rather
want split packages to be able to have a split build function.
--
Sinc
You're as keen as I am :)
What would be useful is a "Flag for deletion" button on the AUR. It
could (for example) only show up once a package has been flagged as
"out of date" for a month, and require a short reason why. It'd save
all these poor devs getting cluttered mailing lists, and would
defi
Hello,
Can the following package be removed please:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/icewm-testing/
It's basically just an out of date duplicate of the icewm package in the
official repos. It uses exactly the same sourceforge.net sources as the
official package, the only difference being that i
.. bummer.
Is that final as well?
J. Leclanche
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Doug Newgard wrote:
> On 2014-06-01 10:56, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>>
>> I don't really understand why AUR helpers can't be updated to only
>> build the package you want in the split pkgbuild. If you look at my
>> sou
Hello,
I think the following package ought to be removed:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/hackedbox/
The package is orphaned, hasn't been updated since 2008 and neither the
upstream url nor the source link work.
The following website lists 0.8.5 as the latest release:
http://freecode.com/proj
I've been looking for a preload solution, and found this
outdated/orphaned wiki article [1] which says the kernel module is no
longer available (replaced by systemd), but the userspace package
"ureadahead" is still in the AUR [2]
(orphaned, "out of date", and no comments for 2 years!)
Thanks,
Stev
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:33 AM, Steven Honeyman
wrote:
> 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 pa
On 2014-06-01 10:56, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
I don't really understand why AUR helpers can't be updated to only
build the package you want in the split pkgbuild. If you look at my
source package, the makedepends are only in their respective package.
Is makepkg limited in that way? Because if it i
I don't really understand why AUR helpers can't be updated to only
build the package you want in the split pkgbuild. If you look at my
source package, the makedepends are only in their respective package.
Is makepkg limited in that way? Because if it is, this is a good
feature to have.
J. Leclanche
On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:20:32AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> On 2014-06-01 10:15, Dave Reisner wrote:
> >On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:10:35AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> >>On 2014-06-01 10:09, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
> >>>On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
> In the AUR, you specifically build pac
On 2014-06-01 10:15, Dave Reisner wrote:
On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:10:35AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
On 2014-06-01 10:09, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
>On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
>>In the AUR, you specifically build packages to install them. When
>>building for binary repos, you build them to u
On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:10:35AM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> On 2014-06-01 10:09, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
> >On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
> >>In the AUR, you specifically build packages to install them. When
> >>building for binary repos, you build them to upload them for others to
> >>install
On 2014-06-01 10:09, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
In the AUR, you specifically build packages to install them. When
building for binary repos, you build them to upload them for others to
install them. HUGE difference.
The AUR is a repository for hosting PKGBUILDs for
On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
In the AUR, you specifically build packages to install them. When
building for binary repos, you build them to upload them for others to
install them. HUGE difference.
The AUR is a repository for hosting PKGBUILDs for packages not in the
repos. Do not conflate th
On 2014-06-01 10:03, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
No?.. Both will be built by default, but building and installing
packages are two very separate things ...
In a binary repo, that is true, but not in the AUR.
Yes it is, makepkg just builds packages by default unless
On 2014-06-01 10:02, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
On 01/06, Steven Honeyman wrote:
You'll need qt4 and qt5 installed to build the package though.
If they don't want that they can just modify the PKGBUILD ever so
slightly instead of the maintainer to have to maintain several
versions of the same P
On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
No?.. Both will be built by default, but building and installing
packages are two very separate things ...
In a binary repo, that is true, but not in the AUR.
Yes it is, makepkg just builds packages by default unless you
explicitly tell it to install them too.
On 01/06, Steven Honeyman wrote:
You'll need qt4 and qt5 installed to build the package though.
If they don't want that they can just modify the PKGBUILD ever so
slightly instead of the maintainer to have to maintain several versions
of the same PKGBUILD
--
Sincerely,
Johannes Löthberg
P
You'll need qt4 and qt5 installed to build the package though.
So that means a large download of qt5, unnecessary writes to the users
SSD, increased install time, and then having to remove qt5 again
afterwards! (or the opposite way around qt5-qt4)
On 1 June 2014 15:51, Doug Newgard wrote:
> On 2
On 2014-06-01 09:50, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
Please don't. You'll force the user to have both qt4 and qt5 installed
even if they just want one of them.
No?.. Both will be built by default, but building and installing
packages are two very separate things ...
In
On 01/06, Doug Newgard wrote:
Please don't. You'll force the user to have both qt4 and qt5 installed
even if they just want one of them.
No?.. Both will be built by default, but building and installing
packages are two very separate things, and split packages exist for the
sole purpose of jus
On 2014-06-01 06:36, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
Hi
I'm trying to upload a split package of sddm -qt5-git and -git
(attached), but when I upload it, it says: "You are not allowed to
overwrite the sddm-qt5-git package.". I'm a maintainer of both of
course.
Is this a bug? If not, what's the correct co
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 at 16:16:08, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> That's very unfortunate and quite a bit counter-intuitive. Is this final?
> [...]
No, it's not. As I said in the other thread [1] on this topic, I am open
for suggestions.
[1] https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2014-May/0
Hi all,
just wanted to let you know about my plan of moving Pandas to community,
so they don't interfere with plans of other TUs or AUR maintainers.
Pandas is popular package (approximately 50 votes for bot python 2 and
python 3 version in AUR[1,2]) and is one of the basic packages for doing
scie
That's very unfortunate and quite a bit counter-intuitive. Is this final?
J. Leclanche
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Lukas Fleischer
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 at 13:36:29, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I'm trying to upload a split package of sddm -qt5-git and -git
>> (attached
After breifly reading through the readme, I'd also opine that the
project's official name is md5deep. Also note this line from the
readme:
> For historical reasons, the program has different options and features when
> run with the names "hashdeep" and "md5deep."
This line would indicate that on
Hi,
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 at 13:36:29, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm trying to upload a split package of sddm -qt5-git and -git
> (attached), but when I upload it, it says: "You are not allowed to
> overwrite the sddm-qt5-git package.". I'm a maintainer of both of
> course.
> Is this a bug?
Hi,
The package [1] is out-of-date.
Please remove [1].
[1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/nikola-zsh-completion/[1][1]
--
Ivaylo Kuzev | @ivo
Hi
I'm trying to upload a split package of sddm -qt5-git and -git
(attached), but when I upload it, it says: "You are not allowed to
overwrite the sddm-qt5-git package.". I'm a maintainer of both of
course.
Is this a bug? If not, what's the correct course of action?
J. Leclanche
On Fri, May 30,
On Sat, 31 May 2014 at 21:08:34, Yichao Yu wrote:
> [...]
> > It is a bit unfortunate that this process makes merging a bit more
> > complicated and results in packages being unavailable for a short
> > transition period (see steps 1 to 3). I didn't come up with something
> > better yet. Should we
On Sunday, June 01, 2014 12:03:26 Berno Strik wrote:
> Can someone please merge
>
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/dcp150c
>into https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/brother-dcp150c
>
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/dcp585cw
>into https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/brother-dcp585cw
Can someone please merge
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/dcp150c
into https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/brother-dcp150c
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/dcp585cw
into https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/brother-dcp585cw
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/dcpj4110dw
into https://aur.a
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 at 09:19:15, Stefan Tatschner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> yesterday I created new packages for my project pynote. Today I realized
> that the new AUR 3.0 now has split package support.
>
> So please delete:
> - pynote-docs [1]
> - pynote-docs-git [2]
>
Both deleted. Thanks for reportin
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 at 09:39:23, Stefan Tatschner wrote:
> I accidentally forgot the 'python-' prefix in my pkgbuild. So please
> remove this one here [1]. I'm sorry for this inconvenience.
>
Deleted, thanks!
> Thanks!
> Stefan
>
> [1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/plaintable/
>
>
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 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
I accidentally forgot the 'python-' prefix in my pkgbuild. So please
remove this one here [1]. I'm sorry for this inconvenience.
Thanks!
Stefan
[1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/plaintable/
Hi,
yesterday I created new packages for my project pynote. Today I realized
that the new AUR 3.0 now has split package support.
So please delete:
- pynote-docs [1]
- pynote-docs-git [2]
I will resubmit them as split packages from pynote and pynote-git.
Thanks!
Stefan
[1]: https://aur.archlin
42 matches
Mail list logo
