Re: [aur-general] aur client

On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 01:49, Alberto Salvia Novella via aur-general wrote: > > Since publishing to the AUR is something that all packagers do quite > frequently, I have developed a software that reduces the related > operations to the bare minimum, making publishing to the AUR instant. > >

Re: [aur-general] Doubt conflict array & request check PKGBUILDS

On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:22, Iyán Méndez Veiga wrote: > > Hi, > > I recently adopted two packages from AUR: adwaita-qt and adwaita-qt4. Today > @morealaz (who is maintaining adwaita-qt-git) asked me to edit some of the > arrays in the PKGBUILD (please read comments in the AUR website) and after

Re: [aur-general] Copyrighted source on https://aur.archlinux.org/

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 07:42, Jones, Philip via aur-general wrote: > > Hi > > There is a package hosted on https://aur.archlinux.org/ that is copyrighted > and not open source. How do I get it removed? > > Thanks > > Philip > > > - > Siemens Industry Software Limited is a limited

Re: [aur-general] Another spam account in AUR

On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 16:20, stefan-husm...@t-online.de wrote: > are UN ambassadors and hollywood actresses using Arch and comment on AUR? > Maybe they do, but this one only spams: Well we do have Jodi Lyn O'Keefe ;)

[aur-general] Spam Account

Another spam account: https://aur.archlinux.org/account/markwilliamson/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [aur-general] chroot clean building and "http 429"

On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 at 12:49, hagar wrote: > > G'Day all, > > I have been rebuilding all my packages properly in a clean chroot. > > I wwas writing a smaill script to put all the packages in order and I > accidentaly got "http 429". > > Any Idea how long that lasts? - I figured out what caused it

Re: [aur-general] keep debugging symbols in AUR package

On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 at 01:28, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote: > > Hi all, > > I use to install AUR package fotoxx. > I get some zappcrash message when closing the application an would like to > help the author finding the bug. > > The author sent adapted source packages to get more debugging

Re: [aur-general] Basilisk pkgbuild is facing a trademark violation?

On 22 May 2018 at 05:37, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote: > On Mon, 21 May 2018 23:17:39 -0400 > Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote: > >> All this being said: >> >> [11:07:23 PM] eschwartz: if you plan to go that >>

Re: [aur-general] Deletion of discord-updater{,-canary}?

On 10 May 2018 at 15:20, Jeremy Audet wrote: >> Adding a pkgver() to Discord in a clean way is proving to be quite > annoying. > >> Adding this to the source=() >> 'https://discordapp.com/api/download/canary?platform=linux=tar.gz' >> causes makepkg to download a file named

Re: [aur-general] Deletion of discord-updater{,-canary}?

>Does the tarball not contain any version information at all? In the asar file sadly. I could add a makedep on it, decompile and retrieve the version but that's a lot of hassle. I'll probably be sticking to manual updates for now.

Re: [aur-general] Deletion of discord-updater{,-canary}?

On 10 May 2018 at 01:50, Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > On 05/09/2018 08:29 PM, Morgan Adamiec via aur-general wrote: >> discord-updater is quite a confusing package to me. I'm not sure is I >> should file a deletion request for it. >

[aur-general] Deletion of discord-updater{,-canary}?

discord-updater is quite a confusing package to me. I'm not sure is I should file a deletion request for it. When discord needs an update it will refuse to start until it is updated. This package appears to be designed to download the latest discord .tar.gz and extract it to ~/.local. By passing

Re: [aur-general] Taking over Discord-PTB

On 1 May 2018 at 07:53, Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > On 05/01/2018 02:38 AM, Morgan Adamiec via aur-general wrote: >> Hi, a week ago i submitted an orphan request for Discord-PTB >> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/discord-ptb/. It fi

[aur-general] Taking over Discord-PTB

Hi, a week ago i submitted an orphan request for Discord-PTB https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/discord-ptb/. It finally got accepted but the co-maintainer 'discordapp' got set as the maintainer so I can not adopt this package. As far as I know 'discordapp' is an account owned by one of the

Re: [aur-general] Issue with proper packaging

eases and only choose those. > > Regards, > Konstantin > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 2:19 PM, Morgan Adamiec via aur-general < > aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > >> On 21 February 2018 at 13:14, Bruno Pagani via aur-general >> <aur-general@archlinux.or

Re: [aur-general] Issue with proper packaging

On 21 February 2018 at 13:14, Bruno Pagani via aur-general wrote: > Le 21/02/2018 à 13:55, Konstantin Gizdov a écrit : > >> Hi, >> >> I'm having trouble making a package under the Arch Packaging Standards. The >> package in question is `simpletools`. >> >> The problem

Re: [aur-general] Rpc Info Order

On 17 February 2018 at 21:04, Alad Wenter via aur-general <aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 08:57:54PM +0000, Morgan Adamiec via aur-general > wrote: >> Yes there's a few easy ways around it, was just wondering if it's a >> bug or not be

Re: [aur-general] Rpc Info Order

Yes there's a few easy ways around it, was just wondering if it's a bug or not before making a bug report. On 17 February 2018 at 20:52, Alad Wenter via aur-general <aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 08:30:58PM +0000, Morgan Adamiec via aur-general > wrote

Re: [aur-general] Rpc Info Order

Looking around a little more It seems to be a split package thing. Split packages always come before normal packages. I feel like something like this would be pretty common and found by now so I'm leaning on this not being a bug and just the way it is. On 17 February 2018 at 20:07, Morgan Adamiec

[aur-general] Rpc Info Order

Previously when using the Rpc interface info requests would always be returned in order of input but I realised this specific request [1] returns out of order. Is order a thing that was never guaranteed and just happened to be true in 99% of instances or is this a true bug?

Re: [aur-general] Please remove gsmartcontrol-svn package from AUR

Probably by committing directly to master for every commit instead of merging from another branch when you're finished your new feature. I do this for small one person projects, i don't care if this commit breaks the build cause I'll fix it in the next one. On 15 February 2018 at 19:54, mar77i

Re: [aur-general] Wrong AUR Build file

, Panayotis Katsaloulis via aur-general <aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote: > > Picking up the package doesn't also have the great responsibility of > maintaining the package? :-o > > > Στις Πεμ, 18 Ιαν, 2018 at 10:02 ΜΜ, ο/η Morgan Adamiec > via aur-general <aur-gener

Re: [aur-general] Wrong AUR Build file

I would probably leave a comment over emailing directly. If you get no response after a while I would then send an orphan/deletion request detailing the problem and pick up the package myself and fix the problems. On 18 January 2018 at 19:55, Panayotis Katsaloulis via aur-general