On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 3:04 AM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/5/22 Thayer Williams <thayer@archlinux.org>:
On 5/21/08, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
However, now that you mentioned swt, it brings up a good point. We can't do this for things like flashplugin just yet. So, should I create some sort of list of packages to NEVER generate sources for?
I think it would be a good idea to implement a blacklist. A lot of factors may warrant its use (size, license, version, etc.)
Hmm, I can only think about packages that we have a special permission to redistribute for: virtualbox-additions in Community and (I may be totally wrong here) flashplayer in Extra), don't know about others. (BTW both packages' "source" and binary are almost the same) What I don't know if redistribution from out site covers our mirrors too.
Ok, so this ran for all repos. I blacklisted a few known bad ones (bash and readline, the mirror used for the source is borked), and the following huge list of packages failed: http://dev.archlinux.org/~aaron/sources/failed.pkgs
Take a second and scan these please - if you can, please correct the source. As Eric pointed out elsewhere, we can merge source change from trunk with archrelease, without the need to re-release the package (this will fix abs too)
Keep in mind there's probably dupes, as it runs for both x86_64 and i686 (and checks for an existing source for the correct version). Let me try to clean those up real quick
Sorted. 431 packages: http://dev.archlinux.org/~aaron/sources/failed.pkgs