Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

Den 02-03-2016 kl. 17:42 skrev Ralf Mardorf: > Is there no recommendation what to use for AUR PKGBUILD pkgver? There's this: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_package_guidelines#The_pkgver.28.29_function -- Namasté, Frederik “Freso” S. Olesen AUR: https://aur.archlinux

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

Den 02-03-2016 kl. 19:15 skrev Eli Schwartz: > And speaking of ugly, learn to love the Pastebin[1] when posting files > to an AUR comment. ;) > > [1] http://pastebin.com/ And speaking of Pastebin.com: > Note: pastebin.com is blocked for some people and has a history of > annoying issues (javascri

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

2016-03-02 23:44 GMT+01:00 Dustin Falgout : > > Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 21:19:08 +0100> From: ballog...@gmail.com > > BTW, it would be nice if you could adopt some more orphan packages in the > > community repository. > > Sure, I could do that. Do you have any particular packages in mind that I > sh

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

> To: aur-general@archlinux.org> From: anthr...@archlinux.org > Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 22:48:27 +0100 > Subject: Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout > > On 03/02/2016 09:19 PM, Balló György wrote: > > If you don't specify tag or commit hash at the end of the git source, then > > you s

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 21:19:08 +0100> From: ballog...@gmail.com > To: aur-general@archlinux.org > Subject: Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout > > 2016-03-02 20:21 GMT+01:00 Dustin Falgout : > > > If you are wondering why I didn't use the short version of the commit hash > > at th

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On 03/02/2016 09:19 PM, Balló György wrote: > If you don't specify tag or commit hash at the end of the git source, then > you should use the -git suffix. Users expect if the package has no -git > suffix, then it's a working static version tested by the maintainer, and > not some experimental code

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

2016-03-02 20:21 GMT+01:00 Dustin Falgout : > If you are wondering why I didn't use the short version of the commit hash > at the end of the pkgver, well that's simply a personal preference of mine > (to use revision numbers instead). I hope that helps clear up any confusion > as to why I chose to

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

> To: aur-general@archlinux.org> From: anthr...@archlinux.org > Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:28:58 +0100 > Subject: Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout > > On 03/02/2016 11:56 AM, Jan Alexander Steffens wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Levente Polyak > > wrote: > >> That was

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 13:15:39 -0500, Eli Schwartz wrote: >And speaking of ugly, learn to love the Pastebin[1] when posting files >to an AUR comment. ;) I was and I'm short in time. Actually I even have a Patebin account. Hopefully I can edit my comment within the next days, remove the PKGBUILD from

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On 03/02/2016 01:05 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:22:09 -0500, Eli Schwartz wrote: >> On 03/02/2016 11:42 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >>> "pkgver() { >>> cd jack2 >>> # get a plain number >>> echo $(git rev-list --count master) >>> }" - https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tr

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:22:09 -0500, Eli Schwartz wrote: >On 03/02/2016 11:42 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >> "pkgver() { >> cd jack2 >> # get a plain number >> echo $(git rev-list --count master) >> }" - https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=jack2-git >> > >That is a super-ugly

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On 03/02/2016 11:42 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > PS: > > I've got a question regarding the jack2-git package from AUR. > > The maintainer does use > > $ git rev-list --count master > 3425 > > [1], but IMO pkgver should be > > $ git describe|sed -r 's/^v//;s/([^-]*-g)/r\1/;s/-/./g' > 1.9.10.r177.g

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

PS: I've got a question regarding the jack2-git package from AUR. The maintainer does use $ git rev-list --count master 3425 [1], but IMO pkgver should be $ git describe|sed -r 's/^v//;s/([^-]*-g)/r\1/;s/-/./g' 1.9.10.r177.g7bdad49 since this is the correct version number, as used by https://

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

Thank you Johannes and Eli, this sounds reasonable, especially since we've got jack2 provided by ABS and AUR to work around this issue. Regards, Ralf

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On 03/02/2016 07:06 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:28:58 +0100, Levente Polyak wrote: >>> The simplest way to make these "static" if you want to import them >>> into [community] is to pin the git source using #commit=1234567. >>> >> >> Also in that case, only if you have a sane rea

Re: [aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On 02/03, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:28:58 +0100, Levente Polyak wrote: The simplest way to make these "static" if you want to import them into [community] is to pin the git source using #commit=1234567. Also in that case, only if you have a sane reason to not stick to the upst

[aur-general] Package from official repos build from git, instead of official upstream release - Was: TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:28:58 +0100, Levente Polyak wrote: >> The simplest way to make these "static" if you want to import them >> into [community] is to pin the git source using #commit=1234567. >> > >Also in that case, only if you have a sane reason to not stick to the >upstream released versions

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On 03/02/2016 11:56 AM, Jan Alexander Steffens wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Levente Polyak > wrote: >> That was fast, but I think you accidentally forgot to implement the most >> important part of my feedback: It is not allowed to have no pkgname VCS >> postfix (like -git) but pull f

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Levente Polyak wrote: > That was fast, but I think you accidentally forgot to implement the most > important part of my feedback: It is not allowed to have no pkgname VCS > postfix (like -git) but pull from a git HEAD. > You either have to rename those packages or

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout

On 03/02/2016 04:16 AM, Dustin Falgout wrote: >> To: aur-general@archlinux.org> From: anthr...@archlinux.org >> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 17:12:04 +0100 >> Subject: Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Dustin Falgout >> >> On 02/28/2016 10:02 PM, Dustin Falgout wrote: >>> I currently maintain six or seve

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== 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 * 43 packages missing signoffs * 2 packages older than 14 days