=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 6 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 25 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days
Am 04.09.2014 um 07:29 schrieb Hugo Osvaldo Barrera:
> An example of these "meta" packages is "meta-group-base-devel", which is an
> "empty"
> package that has all the packages in "base-devel" as dependencies.
> This helps me keep things like "pacman -Qen" short and readable, and also make
> sure
What happens if something really belongs in two categories? In that case,
one should use a tagging mechanism instead of a categorization mechanism.
> On the other hand, I think we should remove category because only a
> few packages actually use correct category. It is almost useless.
+1
— Jerem
If you're serious about using a custom package across all your systems in a
native way, one option is to add a new paragraph into /etc/pacman.conf:
# An example of a custom package repository. See the pacman manpage for
# tips on creating your own repositories.
#[custom]
#SigLevel
I added vim-colors-lettuce to replace vim-lettuce. The original vim-lettuce
package is now obsolete.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vim-lettuce/
On 2014-09-04 14:07, lolilolicon wrote:
>
> How about tags=(awesome cool game)?
Well, my goal is to sometime be able to search installed packages quickly.
I have installed some games of which I can't recall their names, and there's
really no quick way to search for them in pacman - that was my
Am 05.09.2014 um 00:51 schrieb Hugo Osvaldo Barrera:
> [...]if they can be parsed by pacman somehow, they would add some use.
> Otherwise, I'm ok
> with deleting them.
pacman has no AUR support, this was a decision. So the only way to allow
it to see such data would be to add it to the PKGBUILD or
On 2014-09-05 02:59, carstene1ns wrote:
> Am 05.09.2014 um 00:51 schrieb Hugo Osvaldo Barrera:
> > [...]if they can be parsed by pacman somehow, they would add some use.
> > Otherwise, I'm ok
> > with deleting them.
> pacman has no AUR support, this was a decision. So the only way to allow
> it to
still we have tons of packages that do not follow category. Searching
by category is ineffective.
I think the best way to know about package is to let users write "aur
packages reviews" for the packages they love.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
> On 2014-09-05 02:59,
