Uwe Vogt a écrit :
perl-archive-extract: (local=0.24-1 aur=0.18-3)
perl-ipc-cmd: (local=0.40-1 aur=0.36-3)
perl-locale-maketext-simple: (local=0.18-2 aur=0.16-3)
perl-module-load: (local=0.12-1 aur=0.10-2)
perl-module-load-conditional: (local=0.22-1 aur=0.16-3)
The perl packages listed abov
On Sat, 3 May 2008, Uwe Vogt wrote:
When I run
$ yaourt Syu -aur
I get this messages. I think this need to be clean up in Aur.
libol: not found on AUR
perl-archive-extract: (local=0.24-1 aur=0.18-3)
perl-ipc-cmd: (local=0.40-1 aur=0.36-3)
perl-locale-maketext-simple: (local=0.18-2 aur=0.16-3
On Sat 2008-05-03 22:19 , Mikko Seppälä wrote:
> [...]
> Btw OT but I was the one who added dpkg (along with po4a), mainly used
> dpkg-deb from it to play with deb packages.
>
> Still should have old PKGBUILDs lying around if you want :p
Protip:
wget http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/dpkg/dpkg.ta
That one may be depending on the xorg meta package, and 2 other packages
that may be in official repos with different names, or are gone/replaced in
AUR. I think there's a huge number of packages that need to be cleaned up
themselves, some even have the buildscript and installscript as executables;
When I run
$ yaourt –Syu –-aur
I get this messages. I think this need to be clean up in Aur.
libol: not found on AUR
perl-archive-extract: (local=0.24-1 aur=0.18-3)
perl-ipc-cmd: (local=0.40-1 aur=0.36-3)
perl-locale-maketext-simple: (local=0.18-2 aur=0.16-3)
perl-module-load: (local=0.12-1 a
Allan McRae wrote:
Alessio Bolognino wrote:
On Fri 2008-05-02 12:08 , Eric Belanger wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
Luká Jirkovský wrote:
But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very,
very old.
Then they probably fall in this category of
On 5/3/08, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This sounds interesting. So if I understand this correctly (which is a big
> assumption), the packages downloaded to your website? What do you mean by
> "make a report"?
Yes. Everything is on my server, including the bot's code and its logs.
Ex
Allan McRae wrote:
The AUR has a large number of obsolete packages which could use
cleaning up. Examples of packages that may be cleaned up are:
- packages that have been renamed or replaced
- old and unmaintained developmental (cvs/svn/etc) packages
This is where you can help. Post su
Geoffroy Carrier wrote:
On 5/2/08, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This situation is behind my reasoning to create a list of potential
removals first. I think we need to be careful of removing too many
packages, especially in our first cleanup attempt. Just the really unneeded
ones
On 5/2/08, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This situation is behind my reasoning to create a list of potential
> removals first. I think we need to be careful of removing too many
> packages, especially in our first cleanup attempt. Just the really unneeded
> ones as a first step. I ha
The list is good idea, maybe someone (eg me ;-)) finds out that there
is some interesting package and he will adopt it.
2008/5/3 Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Alessio Bolognino wrote:
>
> > On Fri 2008-05-02 12:08 , Eric Belanger wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, 3 May 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
> >
Alessio Bolognino wrote:
On Fri 2008-05-02 12:08 , Eric Belanger wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
Luká Jirkovský wrote:
But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very, very old.
Then they probably fall in this category of the suggest remo
I agree with Alessio here. However, if the upstream development has stopped
and the sources for the package can no longer be located, then I think the
package should be removed.
--
Abhishek
On Fri 2008-05-02 12:08 , Eric Belanger wrote:
> On Sat, 3 May 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
>
>> Luká Jirkovský wrote:
>>> But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very, very old.
>>>
>> Then they probably fall in this category of the suggest removal guidelines
>> - outdated and orphan
On Sat, 03 May 2008 00:57:00 +1000
Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK. Given I know very, very little about IRC, does someone else want to
> make an IRC channel. Either that, or we could ask if it would be OK to
> use the archlinux-bugs (or whatever it is called) channel which tends to
On Sat, 3 May 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
Luká Jirkovský wrote:
But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very, very old.
Then they probably fall in this category of the suggest removal guidelines
- outdated and orphaned packages with few or no votes
This situation is behind
I think you should announce that on a news. A news will be translated for
each communities whereas a post in the forum will probably get ignored and
non english speaking people won't be advised a cleanup is pending.
Maybe a link should be added to the front page of AUR ?
Cilyan
2008/5/2, Allan M
Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:
But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very, very old.
Then they probably fall in this category of the suggest removal guidelines
- outdated and orphaned packages with few or no votes
This situation is behind my reasoning to create a list of pote
But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very, very old.
2008/5/2 Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Callan Barrett wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Lukáš Jirkovský <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Just my 2 cents: I think, that packages without arch=() fiel
Callan Barrett wrote:
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Lukáš Jirkovský <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just my 2 cents: I think, that packages without arch=() field should
be also removed.
That seems like a bit much. There's probably a lot of good packages in
the AUR without this field and
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Lukáš Jirkovský <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just my 2 cents: I think, that packages without arch=() field should
> be also removed.
That seems like a bit much. There's probably a lot of good packages in
the AUR without this field and it's not like it's that hard
Just my 2 cents: I think, that packages without arch=() field should
be also removed.
2008/5/2 Pierre CHAPUIS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Le Fri, 02 May 2008 23:53:51 +1000,
> Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
>
>
> > I suggest we get together in the TU IRC channel on the weekend of 17/18
>
Le Fri, 02 May 2008 23:53:51 +1000,
Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> I suggest we get together in the TU IRC channel on the weekend of 17/18
> May and go through the list. I think we should take care not to get too
> carried away when we remove packages. While some packages may be
I too never got around to getting my IRC channel key for the same reason!
Email the announcement to [EMAIL PROTECTED] too... Then people
who don't follow the forums will also get to know.
Abhishek
Hi all,
I think there is enough support for this to go forward. So it is time
we nut out the details. Here is how I suggest we go about it.
Firstly, I make a post to the announcements section of the forums along
the lines of:
The AUR has a large number of obsolete packages which could u
25 matches
Mail list logo
