[arch-dev-public] Out-of-date orphans in repo
Hi, Lately, I've been updating out-of-date orphans. So far I did the ones that were easy to update/test so this is a status report on the remaining ones. The purpose here is, ideally, to find maintainers for them or at least testers (devs or users). BTW, make sure that you are listed as maintainer for both arches of the packages you maintain even if you can't build the package for that architecture. Several packages have only one of their arch adopted. This clutters the list of orphaned and it spams the dev ML with out-of-date notifications. Here the commented list: lirc : Hugo maintains lirc-utils so I guess he should adopt it too. gmpc: Needs an updated libmpd to build. I'll email Tobias if he doesn't answer here. gnash-common: gnash-gtk: Andy has started a thread for these. I'll wait where it goes. guile-gtk: Needs gtkglarea 2.X to build. Best way to handle this is to add a gtkglarea2 in the repo instead of updating gtkglarea as they changed the library name. Other alternative, moving guile-gtk to community/AUR happy: One of the Haskell guy should pick it up. libgda: libgnomedb: Major version bump. Might have an soname bump. I'll need to check. lshwd: Package in the repo is at the latest stable (few years old). There's a newer rc release but : do we still need this? It's still popular (25.39 %) though so I could always update it to the rc release. lzo: We have lzo2 in core.Only a community pkg depends on it so it could be moved to community. junit: I believe there was a reason why it wasn't at the latest version. Is it still the case? evms: exim: gphoto2: libgphoto2: pdns: user-mode-linux: userui: I can't really test the rest. Is there anyone able/willing to test updated packages for them? In fact, I didn't really checked them out. evms and exim seems important so I'm not confortable to push them even in testing without any good testing. For the rest, if noone comes forward, I could test them as good as I can and push them to testing then as for testers on the arch-general ML much like I did for the scim stuff. Moving some of them to AUR is always a possibility. Eric
gmpc: Needs an updated libmpd to build. I'll email Tobias if he doesn't answer here. I'll take care of it.
-T
Allan McRae wrote:
Tobias Kieslich wrote:
gmpc: Needs an updated libmpd to build. I'll email Tobias if he doesn't answer here.
I'll take care of it.
-T
I also need the updated libmpd for gimmix in [community]. Let me know if you need a hand with the rebuilds.
Hmmm... apart from gmpc, the only other package that requires a rebuild in [extra] is xfce4-mpc-plugin. So you can do this on your own! :D
Eric Bélanger schrieb:
lshwd: Package in the repo is at the latest stable (few years old). There's a newer rc release but : do we still need this? It's still popular (25.39 %) though so I could always update it to the rc release.
We should really drop this hwd stuff. Apparently some howtos still recommend using "hwd -xa" to generate xorg.conf, but this command will generate a bloated configuration file that is probably not even compatible to the latest xorg-server versions.
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 11:29 +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
We should really drop this hwd stuff. Apparently some howtos still recommend using "hwd -xa" to generate xorg.conf, but this command will generate a bloated configuration file that is probably not even compatible to the latest xorg-server versions.
I would like to get rid of both lshwd and hwd packages. I don't consider them useful anymore, as there's better autodetection methods available in archlinux. Removing hwd will fix bug 13448, 13447 and 13630.
2009/3/8 Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net>:
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 11:29 +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
We should really drop this hwd stuff. Apparently some howtos still recommend using "hwd -xa" to generate xorg.conf, but this command will generate a bloated configuration file that is probably not even compatible to the latest xorg-server versions.
I would like to get rid of both lshwd and hwd packages. I don't consider them useful anymore, as there's better autodetection methods available in archlinux.
Removing hwd will fix bug 13448, 13447 and 13630.
I've never found them very useful myself so I don't have issue with them going.
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 11:01, Phil Dillon-Thiselton <dibblethewrecker@gmail.com> wrote:
2009/3/8 Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net>:
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 11:29 +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
We should really drop this hwd stuff. Apparently some howtos still recommend using "hwd -xa" to generate xorg.conf, but this command will generate a bloated configuration file that is probably not even compatible to the latest xorg-server versions.
I would like to get rid of both lshwd and hwd packages. I don't consider them useful anymore, as there's better autodetection methods available in archlinux.
Removing hwd will fix bug 13448, 13447 and 13630.
I've never found them very useful myself so I don't have issue with them going.
+1
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 11:29 +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
We should really drop this hwd stuff. Apparently some howtos still recommend using "hwd -xa" to generate xorg.conf, but this command will generate a bloated configuration file that is probably not even compatible to the latest xorg-server versions.
I would like to get rid of both lshwd and hwd packages. I don't consider them useful anymore, as there's better autodetection methods available in archlinux.
Removing hwd will fix bug 13448, 13447 and 13630.
Sounds good, let's remove them.
Sorry, guys. I think i missed this thread. Anyway, i just adopted the lirc package. -- Hugo
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 17:38:00 -0500 Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
Lately, I've been updating out-of-date orphans. So far I did the ones that were easy to update/test so this is a status report on the remaining ones. The purpose here is, ideally, to find maintainers for them or at least testers (devs or users).
BTW, make sure that you are listed as maintainer for both arches of the packages you maintain even if you can't build the package for that architecture. Several packages have only one of their arch adopted. This clutters the list of orphaned and it spams the dev ML with out-of-date notifications.
Here the commented list:
userui:
I think I have forgotten this package after I have removed tuxonice kernel from the extra repo long time ago. This can be moved to AUR/community, I think. You and Thomas suggested it on the arch-ML already. Feel free to move it from my side. Cheers, Daniel
participants (10)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Allan McRae
-
Daenyth Blank
-
Daniel Isenmann
-
Eric Bélanger
-
Hugo Doria
-
Jan de Groot
-
Phil Dillon-Thiselton
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Tobias Kieslich