Hi, I recently took over maintenance of Kstars, but discovered after that it
is no longer distributed by itself, instead its part of the kdeedu
collection, furthermore it can be installed by itself from kdemod. IMHO I
believe this package is now unnecessary.
Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Allan McRae <allan(a)archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Allan McRae wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I have just put python-2.6.2-1 into [testing]. This remove the python-2.5
>>> compatibility sitepath so anything not rebuilt since python-2.6 was release
>>> will be broken. The list of broken packages as of yesterday is in FS#13831
>>> Note that these don't need built against the python in [testing] to be
>>> fix, just rebuilt against an python-2.6 package.
>> Giving this a big bump... Many packages still are not rebuilt and I want to
>> move python from [testing] soon.
> Do you have an updated list?
Here is the updated list:
I have also attached this to the relevant bug report in the tracker.
Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Allan McRae <allan(a)archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Attila wrote:
>>> i recognized that there is new package in aur for opera with this
>>> "This package is the official one from the [extra] repository. We have to
>>> it because of a unclear license issue. After we have clarify this issue
>>> package will be back in the repos or not. It should not be moved to
>>> community, because of the license."
>>> I'm a little bit surprised that a custom license is such a problem because
>>> this shows me 343 entries:
>>> find /var/abs -name PKGBUILD | \
>>> xargs grep license | \
>>> grep custom | grep extra | wc -l
>>> Will now all packages with custom licenses disappear from extra?
>> No. Only the ones where it is unclear if we can legally distribute it.
> To clarify a little more, a "custom" license is not a specific type of
> license. It just means the package ships a license that is
> non-standard and doesn't have a name. The license that is shipped with
> Opera has some odd language, making us unable to ship it at this
> current time.
Then also this opera package should be moved from community to AUR
Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi ( djgera )
Key fingerprint = 0CAA D5D4 CD85 4434 A219 76ED 39AB 221B 1B8C 330D
the developer of ardour changed the download page (1) in a way that
doesn't allow downloads without going through a dialogue where he asks
for donation. Donation is not mandatory but there's no direct link to
the source tarball available anymore. All ardour packages, including
the one I maintain (2), are broken since this change.
The in my opinion best way to overcome this issue is to determine the
svn revision of the release, check it out and build that instead.
Although it technically using svn it wouldn't follow a branch.
Would it ok to just leave the package name as is?
The other method I can think of that wouldn't need svn would be to
upload the tarball elsewhere, something I rather not do.
I request the AUR package 'changefirefoxicon' be deleted for duplicate
(of 'firefox-branded') and severe breach of all good PKGBUILD rules.
Just look at it, but I warn you as you might fall right from your chair
either laughing or crying. Please just delete it.