On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Justin Dray jus...@dray.be wrote:
Good question. One of my packages got deleted last year because it was arm
only. I no longer used any arm systems, and was just maintaining it, so I
didn't bother chasing it up. But I'm also interested in the answer to that.
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 2 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 1 fully signed off package
* 10 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:58 PM, LoneVVolf lonew...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Martti,
the problem is not assembly in the source code, , but the fact that all
compilers deliver machine-specific code .
compile a C program on an arm processor, try to run the binary on a x86
processor.
It will fail
* David Phillips dbphillip...@gmail.com (Fri, 21 Nov 2014 22:41:14
+1300):
I think ARM-only packages should be tolerated on the AUR, simply
because AUR is the place where people look for PKGBUILDs.
That is actually a fair point, and I agree with you. But we do have to
keep in mind that
* P. A. López-Valencia vorb...@outlook.com (Fri, 21 Nov 2014
07:49:44 -0500):
On 21/11/14 07:32, Alfredo Palhares wrote:
Please delete texlive-gantt[1]
Please use the AUR interface for filing a deletion request.
Even better, file a merge request, not a deletion request.
Regards,
Marcel
* Marcel Korpel marcel.kor...@gmail.com (Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:18:10
+0100):
Even better, file a merge request, not a deletion request.
Nevermind, texlive-latexextra is in [extra], so you can't merge that
package.
Regards,
Marcel
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 02:14:53PM +0100, Marcel Korpel wrote:
That said, I wonder why Arch Linux ARM, which *is* a different project,
doesn't provide its own AUR? Wouldn't that be a solution for ARM-only
packages?
This was my first thought. There isn't a reason for arm-only packages
to be in
