On 21.09.2010 00:43, Jan Steffens wrote:

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Brad Fanella wrote:

...

Hi guys,

I have a package (bin32-chuck) that needs to me moved to multilib, as the developer currently has no native source for x86_64. I hope this is the correct place to ask, but could I have "permission" (for my user) to submit that package to multilib?

Thanks, Brad

3 votes? Seems obscure.

On the other hand, it adds no dependencies and isn't very large.

In any case, it would need to be properly compiled using gcc-multilib. The PKGBUILD on AUR does not do that and uses the old, broken scheme of repackaging i686 packages.

in addition i would prefer adding proper support for x86_64 to the actual chuck PKGBUILD instead using bin32-chuck name.

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Jan Steffens wrote:

...

Hi guys,

I have a package (bin32-chuck) that needs to me moved to multilib, as the developer currently has no native source for x86_64. I hope this is the correct place to ask, but could I have "permission" (for my user) to submit

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Brad Fanella wrote: that package to multilib?

...

Thanks, Brad _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

3 votes? Seems obscure.

On the other hand, it adds no dependencies and isn't very large.

In any case, it would need to be properly compiled using gcc-multilib. The PKGBUILD on AUR does not do that and uses the old, broken scheme of repackaging i686 packages. _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Chuck is in [community]. The developers upstream were having problems with x86_64, so only i686 is available for compilation. See: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/20881 On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:

in addition i would prefer adding proper support for x86_64 to the actual chuck PKGBUILD instead using bin32-chuck name.

I could do that if you like. Would that be the better option in this situation?

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:50 PM, SpepS wrote:

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 05:43:32PM -0500, Brad Fanella wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Jan Steffens wrote:

...

...

Hi guys,

I have a package (bin32-chuck) that needs to me moved to multilib, as the developer currently has no native source for x86_64. I hope this is the correct place to ask, but could I have "permission" (for my user) to submit

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Brad Fanella wrote: that package to multilib?

...

Thanks, Brad _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

3 votes? Seems obscure.

On the other hand, it adds no dependencies and isn't very large.

In any case, it would need to be properly compiled using gcc-multilib. The PKGBUILD on AUR does not do that and uses the old, broken scheme of repackaging i686 packages. _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Chuck is in [community]. The developers upstream were having problems with x86_64, so only i686 is available for compilation.

See: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/20881

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Ionut Biru wrote:

...

in addition i would prefer adding proper support for x86_64 to the actual chuck PKGBUILD instead using bin32-chuck name.

I could do that if you like. Would that be the better option in this situation?

...

_______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

I have updated the bin32-chuck PKGBUILD according to the multilib system. I think now it could be adopted for an inclusion. _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

What is the status of this? Do I have permission to move it to multilib?

On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Jan Steffens wrote:

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Brad Fanella wrote:

...

What is the status of this? Do I have permission to move it to multilib? _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Well, I'd say "yes". The i686 version is already in [community] and it adds no dependencies to [multilib]. _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Sorry, my bad. I forgot to mention that that was more of a two part question: 1) May I move it? 2) If so, may my user have access to multilib so I may do so? Thanks, Brad

On 10/06/2010 12:38 AM, Brad Fanella wrote:

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Brad Fanella wrote:

...

On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Jan Steffens wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Brad Fanella wrote:

...

What is the status of this? Do I have permission to move it to multilib? _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Well, I'd say "yes". The i686 version is already in [community] and it adds no dependencies to [multilib]. _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Sorry, my bad. I forgot to mention that that was more of a two part question: 1) May I move it? 2) If so, may my user have access to multilib so I may do so?

Thanks, Brad

I hate to sound rude or pushy, but this bug has been open since September 18th and it could have been fixed in a matter of hours. If someone wants to build it themself, then I have absolutely no problem with that. I just need user permissions for [multilib] if I am going to have to submit it.

i still not see an up to date PKGBUILD committed in community. http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/community/chuck/trunk/PKGBUILD i said from the beginning that i dislike the idea of bin32-chuck -- Ionuț

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Brad Fanella wrote:

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote:

...

On 10/06/2010 12:38 AM, Brad Fanella wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Brad Fanella  wrote:

...

On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Jan Steffens  wrote:

...

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Brad Fanella  wrote:

...

What is the status of this? Do I have permission to move it to multilib? _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Well, I'd say "yes". The i686 version is already in [community] and it adds no dependencies to [multilib]. _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Sorry, my bad. I forgot to mention that that was more of a two part question: 1) May I move it? 2) If so, may my user have access to multilib so I may do so?

Thanks, Brad

I hate to sound rude or pushy, but this bug has been open since September 18th and it could have been fixed in a matter of hours. If someone wants to build it themself, then I have absolutely no problem with that. I just need user permissions for [multilib] if I am going to have to submit it.

i still not see an up to date PKGBUILD committed in community.

http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/community/chuck/trunk/PKGBUILD

i said from the beginning that i dislike the idea of bin32-chuck

-- Ionuț _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Up-to-date? What part of it is not up-to-date?

I thought we had come to the consensus that it should be created. I cannot add x86_64 support for it in [community] as the chuck team has temporarily dropped native 64-bit support for it.

I believe he wants you to add x86_64 support to the chuck PKGBUILD in community. See how it's done for skype. Just commit the change to the PKGBUILD in trunk and he'll build it (I guess). Eric

Not that it matters much to me personally. I just want to get all of this chuck business straightened out.

Thanks, Brad _______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Brad Fanella wrote:

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Eric Bélanger wrote:

...

I believe he wants you to add x86_64 support to the chuck PKGBUILD in community.  See how it's done for skype.  Just commit the change to the PKGBUILD in  trunk  and he'll build it (I guess).

Eric

That doesn't seem right... If anyone wants a working PKGBUILD, simply use bin32-chuck PKGBUILD that SpepS was nice enough to write up.  [1].

I don't understand how we can add x86_64 support to chuck as both lib32-gcc-libs and lib32-libsndfile are dependencies.

[1] http://aur.pastebin.com/TdDUYhD4

Truly sorry if I am missing something here.

Thanks a ton, Brad

Did you checked how it's done for skype or wine? Use conditional statements: if [[ $CARCH == i686 ]]; then depends=('gcc-libs' 'libsndfile') else depends=('lib32-gcc-libs' 'lib32-libsndfile') fi and so on.

_______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Brad Fanella wrote:

On Oct 7, 2010, at 9:51 PM, Eric Bélanger wrote:

...

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Brad Fanella wrote:

...

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Eric Bélanger wrote:

...

I believe he wants you to add x86_64 support to the chuck PKGBUILD in community.  See how it's done for skype.  Just commit the change to the PKGBUILD in  trunk  and he'll build it (I guess).

Eric

That doesn't seem right... If anyone wants a working PKGBUILD, simply use bin32-chuck PKGBUILD that SpepS was nice enough to write up.  [1].

I don't understand how we can add x86_64 support to chuck as both lib32-gcc-libs and lib32-libsndfile are dependencies.

[1] http://aur.pastebin.com/TdDUYhD4

Truly sorry if I am missing something here.

Thanks a ton, Brad

Did you checked how it's done for skype or wine? Use conditional statements:

if [[ $CARCH == i686 ]]; then  depends=('gcc-libs' 'libsndfile') else  depends=('lib32-gcc-libs' 'lib32-libsndfile') fi

and so on.

...

_______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

_______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib

Yep. That's exactly how I did it.

Sorry 'bout that. I wasn't thinking straight. I took a look at the lib32 dependencies and automatically assumed that it needed to be placed into multilib' completely disregarding the fact that they are simply build-time dependencies.

Thanks, Brad

Actually, it depends on lib32 packages so the x86_64 chuck package must go in multilib. I see you already put a package in community. You can leave it there for the time being. Someone with access to multilib can easily move it to multilib repo.

_______________________________________________ arch-multilib mailing list arch-multilib@archlinux.org http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-multilib