Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-22 Thread stefan-husm...@t-online.de
-Original Message- > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 02:54:48 +0100 > Subject: Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR > From: Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > > Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote: > > Please see the

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-22 Thread Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi wrote: > Please see these packages, it contains a builded packages, binaries and some > sources. > > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=4011 > > This orphaned package is replaced by http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=22284 so it's secure to delete it. Is list

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Daenyth Blank
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 21:03, Loui Chang wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 06:50:18PM -0500, Daenyth Blank wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 18:19, Loui Chang wrote: >> > Where are you seeing 'poop'? >> >> I was seeing it too, when I used the link from a notification email. I >> think it happens

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Andrei Thorp
Bahahaha. I'm seriously cracking up, thanks. On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Loui Chang wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 06:50:18PM -0500, Daenyth Blank wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 18:19, Loui Chang wrote: > > > Where are you seeing 'poop'? > > > > I was seeing it too, when I used the l

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Loui Chang
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 06:50:18PM -0500, Daenyth Blank wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 18:19, Loui Chang wrote: > > Where are you seeing 'poop'? > > I was seeing it too, when I used the link from a notification email. I > think it happens when the URL is malformed... the name of the > commenter

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Loui Chang
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 06:50:18PM -0500, Daenyth Blank wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 18:19, Loui Chang wrote: > > Where are you seeing 'poop'? > > I was seeing it too, when I used the link from a notification email. I > think it happens when the URL is malformed... the name of the > commenter

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread stefan-husm...@t-online.de
-Original Message- > Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:50:18 +0100 > Subject: Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR > From: Daenyth Blank > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 18:19, Loui Chang > wrote:

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Daenyth Blank
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 18:19, Loui Chang wrote: > Where are you seeing 'poop'? > > I was seeing it too, when I used the link from a notification email. I think it happens when the URL is malformed... the name of the commenter was appended to the URL after the package ID, and all comments on the

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread stefan-husm...@t-online.de
-Original Message- > Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:39:27 +0100 > Subject: Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR > From: Aaron Griffin > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:36 PM, stefan-husm...@t-online.de >

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Aaron Griffin
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:36 PM, stefan-husm...@t-online.de wrote: >> From: Loui Chang >> Where are you seeing 'poop'? >> >> > The poop is gone, sorry, I do not remember where I saw it.. This is the best exchange on this list yet. If the button text changed, I imagine someone (wizzo?) was testi

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread stefan-husm...@t-online.de
-Original Message- > Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:19:36 +0100 > Subject: Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR > From: Loui Chang > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 12:03:50AM +0100, stefan-husm...@t-online.d

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Loui Chang
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 12:03:50AM +0100, stefan-husm...@t-online.de wrote: > findwild was mine, I did a fresh upload, that fixed it. > I deleted micq (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=7928) because > last update was 2006 and the maintainer did not respond to the comments > of several users

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread stefan-husm...@t-online.de
-Original Message- > Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:16:28 +0100 > Subject: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR > From: Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > > Please see these packages, it contains a builded packages,

Re: [aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Ray Rashif
Nope. Just the buildscript and any necessary requirements that cannot be downloaded by the user. You won't be stopping soon, that I can assure you. There are bound to be such packages around..

[aur-general] Bad packages in AUR

2009-02-20 Thread Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi
Please see these packages, it contains a builded packages, binaries and some sources. http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14252 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=20933 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=4011 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=17880 http://aur.archlinux.org