Re: [aur-general] TU removal: Ray Rashif

ylaws a vote has now been started: > > https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=120 > > The results are in: > > Yes: 36 > No: 7 > Abstain: 6 > Total: 49 > Participation: 87.50% > > The quorum of 66% has been reached with a larger number of "Yes", than > &quo

Re: [aur-general] TU Application: David Runge

On 24 October 2017 at 22:54, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote: > Em outubro 24, 2017 14:43 Rashif Ray Rahman escreveu: >> >> On 18 October 2017 at 18:40, Rashif Ray Rahman >> wrote: >>> >>> The discussion begins now and will last until 23 October, after which >>> the voting period will begin on 24 Octob

Re: [aur-general] TU Application: David Runge

On 25 October 2017 at 06:12, Eli Schwartz wrote: > On 10/24/2017 12:43 PM, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: >> Some issues were raised based on automated tool reports, which I >> think David will be able to resolve. > > Excuse me? I am hardly an "automated tool report". :p You seem to have > derived that

Re: [aur-general] TU inactivity

On 31 July 2012 05:03, Kyle wrote: > Thanks for all you do to keep Arch talking. See you next week. Yes, Chris, I just want to say you're an awesome guy (note: he was my awesome TU sponsor) especially for creating and maintaing TalkingArch and in general making awesome computing accessible. Take

Re: [aur-general] orphaned community packages (intel-tbb, arpack, libmatio, xml-rpc and aspell-pt)

On 4 January 2012 08:23, Eduardo Martins Lopes wrote: > Actually the question regarding the names is about creating an aur package > with the same name of the orphaned ones since the aur is where i can > maintain those packages. Oh no you can't do that. You have to use a different name. For packa

Re: [aur-general] orphaned community packages (intel-tbb, arpack, libmatio, xml-rpc and aspell-pt)

On 3 January 2012 07:39, Eduardo Martins Lopes wrote: > Hello guys, > I have an aur package > (opencv-tbb https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42121) that depends on > intel-tbb, but this one is an orphaned community package and i would like to > maintain it. Can i upload a pkbuild to the

Re: [aur-general] Merry Christmas!

On 24 December 2011 22:28, Jesse Jaara wrote: > Merry christmas for every christian people. I hope people from another > religion don't mind us wishing merry Christmas. If they do, their at a loss - 'tis the season to be jolly ;p Merry Christmas and happy holidays! -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1

Re: [aur-general] Christmas Cleanup of [community] - Stage 2

On 14 December 2011 21:55, Alexander Rødseth wrote: > Oh, and please update the table at > > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Christmas_Cleanup#Orphaned_community_packages_that_should_be_moved_to_unsupported > once packages have been moved. > > Thanks. :) > > -- > Sincerely, > Alexander Røds

Re: [aur-general] [PATCH] Added handling of ctrl-c

On 9 December 2011 19:27, Alexander Rødseth wrote: > Hi, > > 2011/12/9 Angel Velásquez : >> HAHA don't you realize that you're sending this thread to aur-general >> right? >> >> pwned. Glasses are good, you know? ahahaha > > I know, I wrote that the wiki "also had it wrong", admitting my mistake.

Re: [aur-general] GPG Key Signing

On 1 December 2011 23:36, Peter Lewis wrote: > On Thursday 01 Dec 2011 09:08:39 Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > > I do find it kind of abnormal that a TU does want to retain his real > name. > > To be fair that are loads of potential reasons why someone wouldn't want > their > actual identity disclosed

Re: [aur-general] "install" recursive?

On 1 December 2011 01:25, Piotr Rogoża wrote: > On 28.11.2011 21:38, Jonathan Steel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was told it was best practice to use "install" rather than "mkdir" > > and "cp" in a PKGBUILD, but how can you copy a directory and its > > contents (recursively) using "install"? > > > >

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Timothy Redaelli

On 30 November 2011 03:47, Timothy Redaelli wrote: > Hi, > I'm sorry that I took too much inspiration from the presentation of > Massimilano. > It was not my intention to disrespect anyone. I've never been good at > describing myself and I was looking for a starting point, but I think > I overdid

Re: [aur-general] [arch-dev-public] Developer/TU key signing

On 25 November 2011 21:27, Ionut Biru wrote: > Hi, > > my arch master key is available [1] with fingerprint 44D4 A033 AC14 0143 > 9273  97D4 7EFD 567D 4C7E A887. > > Every packager please do: > > 1) reply this email in the mailing list, include gerolde/sigurd username > and sign your reply using y

Re: [aur-general] TU Resignation

On 21 November 2011 00:10, Jelle van der Waa wrote: > On 19/11/11 19:44, Thomas S Hatch wrote: >> >> I have a lot of regret doing this, and I have been working hard to find >> the >> time to keep up with my TU duties, but every day I have less and less time >> because work is continually ramping u

Re: [aur-general] Resigning as a TU

On 21 November 2011 02:17, Thorsten Töpper wrote: > On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 16:02:58 +0100 > Stefan Husmann wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I want to resign as a TU. I do not have the time anymore to fulfill >> my TU duties and to handle the new package signing stuff. >> >> By the way I suggest to remove th

Re: [aur-general] Update request for supertuxkart

On 20 November 2011 03:29, Laurent Carlier wrote: > One solution should be to embed an irrlicht svn snapshot in supertuxkart > package. That is for upstream to do, if they're so dependent on devel versions of software. -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1

Re: [aur-general] Inactive / past TU

On 8 November 2011 23:38, Karol Blazewicz wrote: > Brad Fanella resigned two weeks ago [1] but he is still listed as an > active TU - is that OK? Should I move him to inactive TUs or to past > ones? I've e-mailed him on this mater two days after his resignation > but got no response. > > [1] > ht

Re: [aur-general] Request to add a rule

On 29 October 2011 06:14, Ray Rashif wrote: > * Uploading a "Microsoft Office 2011 Demo" PKGBUID that retrieves an > official *non-redistributable* archive containing clean executables is > WRONG. Ammendment to this part: * Uploading a "Microsoft Office 2011 Demo"

Re: [aur-general] Request to add a rule

On 28 October 2011 23:55, Peter Lewis wrote: > On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Christopher luna wrote: >> Im not even asking you to agree with me, Im asking you to vote and decide if >> including urls to warez on pkgbuilds that are on AUR is OFFICIALY ok, or not. >> >> again is not about they being propietar

Re: [aur-general] TU Resignation

On 25 October 2011 12:47, Brad Fanella wrote: > p.s. there were some personal issues as well, but I don't really feel the > need to get into those here ~ we can let Xyne speculate with one of his > riveting stories Sorry to hear about this especially. Anyway, thanks for all your work. Take care a

Re: [aur-general] berlios is dying

On 14 October 2011 06:00, Andrea Scarpino wrote: > On Friday 14 October 2011 05:56:59 Ray Rashif wrote: >> Yes, I agree. This is important. Glad it's been brought up, I wasn't >> aware of this. > I was, but we cannot do anything about. We've just to wait for upst

Re: [aur-general] berlios is dying

On 14 October 2011 05:49, Sergej Pupykin wrote: > On 14.10.2011 00:26, Stefan Husmann wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> this is merly an upstream issue, but it might be good to be aware of it: >> >> berlios will be closed with the end of this year. See >> http://www.berlios.de/ >> Projects hosted there wi

Re: [aur-general] TU Application - Massimiliano Torromeo

On 3 October 2011 23:56, Massimiliano Torromeo wrote: > - ttf-ubuntu-font-family > - e4rat > - vdfuse > - vbox-runner Looking forward to those :) Good luck! -- GPG/PGP ID: 8AADBB10

Re: [aur-general] Vote on Alexander Rødseth's (trontonic) TU application

On 17 September 2011 20:22, Evangelos Foutras wrote: > On 09/09/11 16:26, Evangelos Foutras wrote: >> Dear TUs, >> >> The discussion period for Alexander's TU application has ended. >> >> Please hop onto the web interface to vote: >> >> https://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=49 > > The voting period

Re: [aur-general] Kate Plugins Group

On 10 September 2011 02:04, Daniel Poulin wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm writing a PKGBUILD for a kate plugin and noticed there are a few other > kate plugins in AUR.  I also maintain a libreoffice plugin and noticed they > are all part of a group (libreoffice-extensions). Should all of us kate > p

Re: [aur-general] Merge request: ttf-ubuntu-font-family and ttf-ubuntu

On 7 September 2011 10:02, Jekyll Wu wrote: > ttf-ubuntu-font-family[1] and ttf-ubuntu[2] are essentially the same, except > that the latter provides an outdated version. > > Please merge [2] into [1]. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41465 > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages

Re: [aur-general] [lmms] unmaintained

On 7 September 2011 19:48, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > Actually updating doesn't seem so straight forward as compilation for the most > recent version breaks. That's because it was never built in a chroot before, and those optdeps need to be makedeps as well. Either that, or least likely, upstrea

Re: [aur-general] [lmms] unmaintained

On 7 September 2011 17:18, Uli Armbruster wrote: > Lmms has been out of date for quite a while. It's been flagged out of date on > June 13th. > I emailed the maintainer Mateusz Herych telling him that only the pkgver and > checksums > have to be updated. He answered, that he's too busy in real l

Re: [aur-general] Merge request: yakuake-git and yakuake-qt4-svn

2011/9/6 Lukáš Jirkovský : > On 6 September 2011 13:31, Ray Rashif wrote: >> On 6 September 2011 16:23, Jekyll Wu wrote: >> >> There is a problem. [1] looks like a bad PKGBUILD to me, with a make >> after cmake. > > That is correct. Ahh crap, yes, I actually

Re: [aur-general] Merge request: yakuake-git and yakuake-qt4-svn

On 6 September 2011 16:23, Jekyll Wu wrote: > yakuake-git[1] and yakuake-qt4-svn[2] are essentially the same. They both > pull code from git://anongit.kde.org/yakuake. > > Since the upstream has switched from svn to git, I would suggest deleting > the -svn package or merging it into the -git pakca

Re: [aur-general] TU Application

On 4 September 2011 05:14, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > Being an audio person I've had a look at the first audio app in the list > (cheesetracker) and I'm not entirely happy with the PKGBUILD. There's > the minor thing that 'jack-audio-connection-kit' is just 'jack' since a > couple of months. Whil

Re: [aur-general] Securing the AUR website

On 5 September 2011 20:35, Pierre Schmitz wrote: > On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 13:55:38 +0200, Cédric Girard wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Ray Rashif wrote: >> >>> it slows down my inherently slow >>> connection (think GPRS/EDGE/2G) >

Re: [aur-general] Securing the AUR website

On 3 September 2011 23:49, Gordon JC Pearce wrote: > One is that https is painfully slow over slow or unreliable connections (GPRS > springs to mind; 3G service is patchy here). > The other is that switching to https has left AUR in a fundamentally broken > state.  If you search for a package on

Re: [aur-general] Securing the AUR website

On 3 September 2011 09:29, Gordon JC Pearce wrote: > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 20:36:34 +0200 > Cédric Girard wrote: > >> > What happens if you *don't want to use https*? >> > >> >> I still have difficulties to understand why people would like to purposely >> avoid using https. > > I still have difficul

Re: [aur-general] TU Resignation

On 31 August 2011 09:11, Loui Chang wrote: > Hello everyone! > > I haven't been very involved with the AUR for a long while, and I don't > really see that changing much. Since I only have a few packages I think > it's time for me to resign as a TU. I may still throw a few patches > around if I fin

Re: [aur-general] Python packaging newbie

On 23 August 2011 07:03, Fabien Devaux wrote: > Hi! > I'm new to arch & his packaging techniques and I have some questions on how > things should be for python2/3 and build() vs package() things as well... > Is this the good place to ask ? If that is all your questions then this is the wrong plac

Re: [aur-general] OK! changing a PKG's name and retaining votes/comments

On 11 August 2011 22:25, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 07:09:44PM +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 05:35:00PM +0200, Lukas Fleischer wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 10:52:54AM -0400, member graysky wrote: >> > > Crap... I thought it was a done deal :(

Re: [aur-general] Private mailing list for TUs?

On 12 August 2011 23:18, Florian Pritz wrote: > Hi, > > I think it would be nice if we had a closed mailing list for TUs only > (and maybe devs if they want to) so we can move more important stuff > from IRC to mail because not everyone uses IRC or is online all the time. > > Keep in mind that it

Re: [aur-general] SuperCollider CleanUp 2

On 29 July 2011 22:35, Bernardo Barros wrote: > supercollider-with-extras-git > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48934 > > supercollider-git-with-plugins-git > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44413 Deleted. -- GPG/PGP ID: 8AADBB10

Re: [aur-general] Deletion Request: old SuperCollider packages

On 29 July 2011 07:03, Bernardo Barros wrote: > old packages (sc uses git now): > --- > > + sc3-plugins-svn >  http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=36602 > > + sced-svn >  http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29285 > > + scvim-svn >  http://aur.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Realtime kernel package name for 3.0

On 23 July 2011 09:49, Bernardo Barros wrote: > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Thomas Gleixner > Date: 2011/7/22 > Subject: [ANNOUNCE] 3.0-rt1 > To: LKML > Cc: linux-rt-users > > > Dear RT Folks, > > I'm pleased to announce the 3.0-rt1 release. > > Changes versus 3.0-rc7-rt0: >

Re: [aur-general] PCSX2 Plugins folder - suggestion?

On 15 July 2011 16:35, Ray Rashif wrote: > On 15 July 2011 10:32, rafael ff1 wrote: >> If the plugins are 32-bit, it's logical to put them in /usr/lib/pcsx2 >> in 32-bit system. But in 64-bit system, I'm not sure if they whether I >> should put them in /usr/l

Re: [aur-general] PCSX2 Plugins folder - suggestion?

On 15 July 2011 10:32, rafael ff1 wrote: > If the plugins are 32-bit, it's logical to put them in /usr/lib/pcsx2 > in 32-bit system. But in 64-bit system, I'm not sure if they whether I > should put them in /usr/lib or /usrlib32/ (inside "pcsx2" folder, of > course). 32-bit libs-related stuff bel

Re: [aur-general] Cleaning up wine packages

On 13 July 2011 16:31, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > Neither is makeable. wine-doors misses source and its functionality now > mostly exists in winetricks. kwine requires kwine-base which doesn't even > exist. Also, KDE integration with wine is already a given anyway. Ahh OK. To the trash with thes

Re: [aur-general] Cleaning up wine packages

On 13 July 2011 15:47, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > There are many wine packages in AUR and many of them are fairly old and/or > obsolete, too. > > I'd like to clean that up. Here are the candidates: > > ... > > kwine (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=6498) > Reason: Extremely old (2007),

Re: [aur-general] zynaddsubfx-lash removal

On 11 July 2011 16:52, Daniele Paolella wrote: > Please remove zynaddsubfx-lash > , the same compilation > options are now included in zynaddsubfx > . Many thanks. Done. -- GPG/PGP ID: 8AADBB10

Re: [aur-general] VCS Packaging Guidelines

On 2 July 2011 23:39, Mark Foxwell wrote: > I think that any _official_ view (even if it's 'either way is fine') > should be added to the VCS PKGBUILD Guidelines wiki page [2]. Done: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=VCS_PKGBUILD_Guidelines&action=historysubmit&diff=148014&oldid=144799

Re: [aur-general] python renaming

On 19 June 2011 21:09, Bernardo Barros wrote: > I think the solution is to be *very* consistent with packages names > whatever the situation of the python3 version is right now. > In other words: pick a guideline and stick to it. If > python2-X/python-X is the way to go, no matter there is a pytho

Re: [aur-general] python renaming

On 19 June 2011 21:09, Bernardo Barros wrote: > I think the solution is to be *very* consistent with packages names > whatever the situation of the python3 version is right now. > In other words: pick a guideline and stick to it. If > python2-X/python-X is the way to go, no matter there is a pytho

Re: [aur-general] removal of pidgin-gtalkinvisible

On 17 June 2011 20:56, Martti Kühne wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > >> Actually, after some consideration his naming is more appropriate, >> since that's the name of the source tarball is gtalk-shared-status. I >> would like my package renamed to that name, though I

Re: [aur-general] removal of pidgin-gtalkinvisible

On 17 June 2011 10:34, Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Martti Kühne wrote: > >> please delete pidgin-gtalkinvisible [1], I'm the maintainer and >> announced deprecation in favor of pidgin-gtalk-shared-status [2] a >> month ago. >> >> cheers! mar77i >> >> [1] https://aur.

Re: [aur-general] Putting android development packages into [community]

On 10 June 2011 04:56, Ray Rashif wrote: > 3. android-{1.5,1.6,2.1,2.2,2.3,2.3.3,3.0,3.1) I think this is a bit too much. This is better: 3. android-{1.5,2.1,2.2,2.3) 1.5 == to target a larger range of devices 2.1,2.2,2.3 (or 2.3.3 or 2.3.4 if those exist as separate archives) == curr

Re: [aur-general] Putting android development packages into [community]

On 10 June 2011 04:19, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > Hi, > > I'm playing with the idea of pulling the android packages into [community]. > They seem to be in strong demand but so far their maintenance track in AUR > has been fairly inconsistent. > > I'd like opinions on this because they have a rath

Re: [aur-general] [AUR] Orphan all old packages flagged as out-of-date

On 8 June 2011 12:13, Allan McRae wrote: > On 08/06/11 14:01, Thorsten Töpper wrote: >> >> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 05:05:22 +0800 >> Ray Rashif  wrote: >>> >>> On 7 June 2011 18:14, Andrea Scarpino  wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi TUs, >>>>

Re: [aur-general] [AUR] Orphan all old packages flagged as out-of-date

On 7 June 2011 18:14, Andrea Scarpino wrote: > Hi TUs, > I'd like to orphan all packages in AUR flagged as out-of-date before February > 2011 (for example, I think 3 months are enough). I find 3 months are not enough (for a busy person). 6 is a nicer number, i.e half a year, plenty of time for sh

Re: [aur-general] [PATCH 1/1] TUs can change package names

On 1 June 2011 23:36, Jakob Gruber wrote: > On 06/01/2011 05:26 PM, D. Can Celasun wrote: >> >> Actually, it is still possible. Here's how it'd work: >> >> - TU changes package name from foo to bar. >> - This automatically triggers an out-of-date notification (and an >> explanation comment) for al

Re: [aur-general] The Unarchiver and provides field

2011/5/23 Cédric Girard : > As this application provides an unrar functionnality, does it make sense to > add a "provides=('unrar')" field in the PKGBUILD? The Unarchiver is not a > drop-in replacement for the "unrar" command. The binary are not the same and > the syntax is different. Absolutely n

Re: [aur-general] optional dependencies that require explicit installation

On 17 May 2011 18:14, Michael Schubert wrote: > 2011/5/17 Ray Rashif > >> >> That's the way it's done. You have those optdeps as makedeps so you >> can finish building the package. >> > > Sorry if I was a bit unclear earlier. The make process does no

Re: [aur-general] optional dependencies that require explicit installation

On 17 May 2011 05:20, Michael Schubert wrote: > 2011/5/16 jesse jaara > >> Put them as make and optional deps :-) >> > > But make doesn't depend on them. Also, I wouldn't want to install weird programming language> in order to get the package to build. That's the way it's done. You have those o

Re: [aur-general] Aurphan in community

On 6 May 2011 21:13, keenerd wrote: > On 5/6/11, Ray Rashif wrote: >> Let me just confirm this: it is the first of its kind, in that it >> "communicates" with the AUR. There is no other tool in the repos that >> makes a connection to the AUR, right? > > Well

Re: [aur-general] Aurphan in community

On 30 April 2011 17:48, Stefan Husmann wrote: > Am 30.04.2011 10:10, schrieb Allan McRae: >> >> On 30/04/11 17:36, Loui Chang wrote: >>> >>> On Sat 30 Apr 2011 16:12 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: On 30/04/11 12:25, Loui Chang wrote: > > On Fri 29 Apr 2011 21:49 -0400, keenerd wrote:

Re: [aur-general] Package Removal Request: some Faenza packages

On 3 May 2011 23:37, Kwpolska wrote: > faenza-k... hxxp://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47201 (still not sure!) And what prompted you to think it _might_ need deletion? -- GPG/PGP ID: 8AADBB10

Re: [aur-general] Leave of absence

On 23 April 2011 13:48, Thomas S Hatch wrote: > I will be unavailable for a few days next week. Last year I had a surgery > which left my left vocal chord paralyzed. Unfortunately my vocal chord has > not healed and I am going to have to get a silicone implant in my voice box > so that I can talk

Re: [aur-general] VCS dupes in the AUR

On 11 April 2011 18:15, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > * schismtracker-cvs https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19499 > * scikits-audiolab-svn https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=21018 > * supercollider-git-with-plugins-svn > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43637 > * qjackctl-cvs h

Re: [aur-general] Web-client for emails: [WAS:Reflector]

On 5 April 2011 18:00, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > Gmail's web interface has THE best approach to threading. Ever. If you > have any other suggestion (web client or linux desktop client) which > comes anywhere close please let me know. Evolution's threading just > doesn't cut it, thunderbird's new one is c

Re: [aur-general] When should pkgrel be updated?

On 1 April 2011 23:48, Thomas S Hatch wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Dave Reisner wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 05:31:34PM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote: >> > On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 12:21 -0300, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote: >> > > On Fri, A

Re: [aur-general] When should pkgrel be updated?

On 1 April 2011 08:12, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > I've seen (in the past) various packages on the AUR which jumped by 3 > or 4 pkgrels in a very short period of time. Sometimes it happens like > this:- > > 1. Maintainer changes something and breaks the package with pkgrel=2 > 2. Bug reported on comments.

Re: [aur-general] Dropping multiget

On 29 March 2011 15:09, Stefan Husmann wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to drop the multiget package from [community] for the following > reasons. > > - the tarball does not build. The error consist in a missing header file and > was reported twice on upstream bugtracker without an answer > > - t

Re: [aur-general] Packaging with DKMS support

On 24 March 2011 09:16, Jason Melton wrote: > Hello, > > Over on the rtl8192se package[1], we have been discussing how to best > support DKMS in packaging (at the AUR level), and I would like to ask > for wider and more experienced comments. I have put my thoughts here > and in more detail on my p

Re: [aur-general] svn tweak

On 21 March 2011 17:15, Peter Lewis wrote: > I have to admit (and I don't intend to offend anyone) that I found it a little > confusing at first, though the "how to be a packager" page appears to have > become a little clearer recently :-) IMO it would be less confusing if there were one whole ar

Re: [aur-general] svn tweak

On 21 March 2011 00:18, keenerd wrote: > It seems accidentally commiting package binaries is an easy error > among new TUs. Never heard of this accident. New TUs should always clear things up before jumping in. One or two mistakes are fine. Is the packaging workflow not clear enough from the gui

Re: [aur-general] How should *-devel packages generally be handled?

2011/3/16 Ng Oon-Ee : > So let's say foo is at version 4.0 (stable), should foo-devel stay at > 3.9 (the last beta/rc/unstable release) or update to 4.0? Stay at the last unstable release.

Re: [aur-general] AUR 1.8.1 - Can No Longer Upload Packages

On 14 March 2011 10:32, Heiko Baums wrote: > Could the reason be some syntax errors? > There are a lot of quotation marks too much. And the settings of your > quotation marks seem to be quite inconsistent. It would be funny if the AUR rejected PKGBUILDs due to syntax "errors" or inconsistency [1]

Re: [aur-general] package submission

On 4 March 2011 01:01, Bernardo Barros wrote: > Yes, maybe more like "tags" not categories. We from pro audio miss a > more specific category too, like "pro audio", since multimedia is much > to much to much broad!! Not really. It is still under "Multimedia", generally. Only in technical circles

Re: [aur-general] [arch-general] Adding AUR packages to [community] packages' provides

On 26 February 2011 17:40, Allan McRae wrote: > On 26/02/11 19:22, Ray Rashif wrote: > >> * Bump pkgrel OR force (I vote for force) for the first time (eg. so >> users get the repo versions and not report bugs many days later while >> still using the AUR package) > &g

Re: [aur-general] [arch-general] Adding AUR packages to [community] packages' provides

On 25 February 2011 19:12, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > Seriously, we should be consistent here. I agree. * Provide/replace/conflict as necessary when promoting a package from AUR (eg. when renaming the package) * Bump pkgrel OR force (I vote for force) for the first time (eg. so users get the repo

Re: [aur-general] Upgraded AUR to 1.8.0

On 22 February 2011 02:06, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 02:03:38AM +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: >> On 21 February 2011 18:08, Dieter Plaetinck wrote: >> > On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 10:47:50 +0100 >> > Lukas Fleischer wrote: >> > >> >

Re: [aur-general] Upgraded AUR to 1.8.0

On 21 February 2011 18:08, Dieter Plaetinck wrote: > On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 10:47:50 +0100 > Lukas Fleischer wrote: > >> The official Arch Linux AUR setup has been upgraded to 1.8.0. For a >> short list of changes, read [1]. >> >> Please report any issues on the AUR bug tracker [2]. >> >> [1] >> htt

Re: [aur-general] Request: Package Revision

On 14 February 2011 01:19, Bernardo Barros wrote: > Hum, > > Maybe just create a symlink in /usr/share/java/Eisenkraut/jar poiting > to /usr/share/eisenkraut/Eisenkraut.jar ? > > Sorry if that too obvious, but I don't do java. Take a look at jsampler [1]. For many java redistributions, they don't

Re: [aur-general] Request: Package Revision

On 14 February 2011 01:09, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > Excerpts from Bernardo Barros's message of 2011-02-13 16:56:09 +0100: >> Hi all, >> >> I don't know much about Java.. but I wanted to package this one >> because of SuperCollider and it seems a good sound editor anyway. >> Please people with e

Re: [aur-general] AUR & Copyright

On 8 February 2011 03:47, Michael Witten wrote: > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 09:29, Kaiting Chen wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Michael Witten wrote: >> >>> See my gcc-svn PKGBUILD: >>> >>>    http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24849 >>> >>> Nobody likes it anyway, so who cares! :-)

Re: [aur-general] Moving packages to Community

On 8 February 2011 03:23, Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > Side note: > Although TUs are a great bunch, I don't think that's the main reason > why people use the AUR. :) As much as I'd like for this thread to die, because the main issue was settled very many replies ago (we all agree that it's bad and we

Re: [aur-general] AUR & Copyright

2011/2/7 Lukáš Jirkovský : > I don't think it matters whether PKGBUILDs are software or not. It never did, but now it does :) > That sounds to me like saying "all bash scripts have to be under GPL, > because BASH is licensed under GPL". If you want to look at it that way, then sure.

Re: [aur-general] AUR & Copyright

2011/2/7 Lukáš Jirkovský : > I think most PKGBUILDs are too simple to be considered software. Simple or not, PKGBUILDs are scripts, and hence software. IMNSHO if you must apply a license to PKGBUILDs, it should be that of makepkg's OR the distribution's (for another distribution using makepkg and

Re: [aur-general] AUR & Copyright

On 7 February 2011 07:21, Xyne wrote: > Ray Rashif wrote: > >> Sorry, bad comparison, then. I'm not really sure what to compare it >> with. We've never had to talk about things like this before (so >> probably the time has come you would say). First of all,

Re: [aur-general] AUR & Copyright

2011/2/7 Cédric Girard : > On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Ray Rashif wrote: > >> Err..it is as relaxed as the wiki. I don't see why any question about >> ownership should arise. If someone wants to claim ownership and not be >> willing to share then so be it (don&#x

Re: [aur-general] AUR & Copyright

On 7 February 2011 02:38, Thomas S Hatch wrote: > You raise a good point, I would think that we would need to post something > on the submit page stating the copyright nature. My brothers are lawyers, I > will check with them as to what the right thing to do is. > > -Thomas S Hatch > On Feb 6, 201

Re: [aur-general] Errors on submission: Invalid name: only lowercase letters are allowed

On 6 February 2011 14:27, andrew thomas wrote: > I tried adopted this package (kernel26-yi) > > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37895 > > But when I tried to upload an updated PKGBUILD. I got rejected with > "Invalid name: only lowercase letters are allowed" > I used makepkg --source to g

Re: [aur-general] Moving packages to Community

On 6 February 2011 06:01, Thomas S Hatch wrote: > I don't think that Hilton was trolling you Maxime, just poking a little fun > at Jelle. He was so engrossed with moving a package (think about the excitement he must have had) that he forgot about the formalities involved.

Re: [aur-general] Moving packages to Community

On 6 February 2011 03:35, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > I moved a lot of packages from AUR in community/extra and every time i did > sent a "thank you" note. From that amount of messages i sent, only once i > got a reply. ONCE. > > Should i be dissapointed? I guess yes. I am? No. No need. The first comment

Re: [aur-general] Moving packages to Community

On 6 February 2011 02:31, Gergely Imreh wrote: > Hi, > > Recently a couple of my packages have been moved to Community but the > process feels a little uneasy to me. This has come up a couple of times before, and we all know it is very wrong to move a package from [unsupported] _without prior not

Re: [aur-general] [community], [unsupported] and AUR

On 3 February 2011 11:14, Xyne wrote: > Hi, > > A post on the forum[1] brought my attention to the Official Repositories wiki > page[2]. > > A recent note by Louipc states: "Technically, both the [community] and > [unsupported] repos make up the AUR.". > > Is this really still true? The AUR websit

Re: [aur-general] Add pyopencl to [community]

On 4 February 2011 04:21, Andrea Scarpino wrote: > On Thursday 03 February 2011 13:49:26 Stéphane Gaudreault wrote: >> * Add pyopencl to [community] (I will use a better name, something like >> python2-pyopencl) > python2-opencl sounds better IMHO. It's all good but one thing: there either needs

Re: [aur-general] poppler 0.16 rebuild

On 31 January 2011 23:30, Jelle van der Waa wrote: > On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 15:50 +0200, Ionuț Bîru wrote: >> Hi, >> >> the rebuilding is almost over and was already moved from staging to >> testing in the morning, the only package that doesn't build is >> openscenegraph and is not related to poppl

Re: [aur-general] Temporary Inactivity

On 29 January 2011 06:36, Jonathan Conder wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm off to the beach again and won't be back until Monday. This time there > is something on my todo list, which is to move the mythplugins-* packages > from community-testing into community once libmysqlclient is updated. If > th

Re: [aur-general] [arch-general] Please settle 'base' in 'depends' for all

On 19 January 2011 22:23, Stéphane Gaudreault wrote: > As the maintainer of A, it is not your job to track dependencies of B and D. > > Again, look at the problem from a different point of view. If tomorrow > dependencies of B change to > > B -> C F (direct dependecies) > > does it mean that A (an

Re: [aur-general] Anybody want apvlv?

On 11 January 2011 05:10, Brad Fanella wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Ray Rashif wrote: >> On 9 January 2011 03:27, Brad Fanella wrote: >>> So with the recent release of apvlv 0.1.0, I have decided to drop >>> maintaining it. >>> >>>

Re: [aur-general] Anybody want apvlv?

On 9 January 2011 03:27, Brad Fanella wrote: > So with the recent release of apvlv 0.1.0, I have decided to drop > maintaining it. > > I believe it now supports UMD file reading of some sort, and this > requires the whole the PSP toolchain to be packaged and submitted to > the repo, which is somet

Re: [aur-general] Time to Step Down

On 8 January 2011 08:28, Aaron Bull Schaefer wrote: > Fellow Trusted Users, > > After almost 4 years of being a TU, I've had less and less time to > dedicate toward maintaining my packages, and so I think it's finally > time for me to step down. Arch users definitely deserve a better > response ti

Re: [aur-general] Audio plug-ins name convention

On 4 January 2011 21:54, Bernardo Barros wrote: > Hi all! > > I'm packaging some audio plug-ins and I wanted to know if there is any > naming convention to this, as with fonts. Nope. > Since there are different formats (LADSPA, LV2,  DSSI and VST), if we > follow the convention used with fonts (

  1   2   3   4   >