Hi,
It's possible to calculate the checksums yourself. Just install the openssl
package and then run the following:
$ openssl sha256 filename.tar.gz
(with filename.tar.gz being the name of the source tarball that you're
using)
Hope this helps
On 4 October 2014 11:54, stef204
, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote:
The merger has taken place for both packages.
On 4 August 2014 14:31, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok folks. As there have been no comments over the weekend I've uploaded
compiz and compiz-bzr:
https
.
Regards
On 1 August 2014 15:04, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote:
@/dev/rs0 Understood. I'll happily take over maintenance. It makes sense
to have the two packages standardised.
@all If alucryd or anyone else doesn't raise any objections by Monday then
I'll upload compiz and compiz
The merger has taken place for both packages.
On 4 August 2014 14:31, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok folks. As there have been no comments over the weekend I've uploaded
compiz and compiz-bzr:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compiz/
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compiz
a derivative of the bzr package. I do
enjoy
maintaining packages but I figured, as the bzr package receives
development,
it would be simple enough for you to apply any changes to both packages
instead of always going through me.
On 07/31/2014 06:58 AM, Charles Bos wrote:
Hello all,
So I'm just
for the merger. If you're sure you would prefer
me to take over as you suggested earlier then please let me know and then
we know where we stand.
On the subject of the stable package, a tarball for 0.9.11.2 has been
released on launchpad.net
Regards
On 27 July 2014 14:11, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com
...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Rob McCathie korr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi /dev/rs0,
Chazza here. If you don't want to continue maintaining compiz-core-devel
I'd be fine with taking over.
Regards
This change sounds sensible to me. I would be more than happy to turn
compiz-core-bzr back into compiz-bzr.
Regarding compiz.org, that has been dead for a long time and I wouldn't
consider it an authority on Compiz information. For instance: on the front
page of wiki.compiz.org it states that
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:
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 thought it was permissible to point to binaries just as long as you
don't include binaries in the tarball that's uploaded to the AUR.
On 23/04/14 12:19, David Phillips wrote:
Could [1] and [2] please be removed? They aren't pointing to source
files, they're pointing to .debs which are, as
Hi,
Can the following package be deleted please:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libnautilus-extension-ubuntu/
I originally uploaded it because the AUR doesn't yet support split
packages but it doesn't really make sense to compile the whole of
nautilus twice and then throw most of it
I've had that as well. Just refresh the view PKGBUILD page :)
On 07/04/14 13:01, arnaud gaboury wrote:
I needed to install on my server rstudio-sever[1]. Looking at the AUR
repository, I found one orphan rstudio-server-git package.
I used this one as a base to build/install the package on my
Hello,
Could the following packages be deleted please:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libupstart/
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gmock-make/
I created them to try and satisfy some Unity dependencies but I've got
patches now which solve the issues better so these two packages are now
The following package:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bluecurve-cursor-theme/
conflicts with this package in the official repos:
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/any/xcursor-bluecurve/
But the AUR package provides extra variants on this cursor theme that
the official repos
Can the following package be removed:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/compiz-pure/
It's supposed to provide Compiz 0.8 plus the gtk-window-decorator. The
package is orphaned, hasn't been updated in nearly 4 years, is several
versions out of date and doesn't build successfully.
Nothing
There are a great deal of orphaned Compiz 0.9 packages in the AUR, some
for the stable releases and some for bazaar. They are all on around
0.9.5 or 0.9.7. These are the packages I'm referring to:
for stable release:
* ccsm-dev -- https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ccsm-dev/
*
Hello,
Please could the following package be removed:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mist-icon-theme-xfce/
I created it as an easy way to add missing icons to Xfce. All it did was
to add some extra icons to /usr/share/icons/Mist
The thing is, it doesn't make sense to add the missing
18 matches
Mail list logo
