August 2010 - Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

Re: [aur-general] Remove kernel-liquorix
by Raul Castillo 16 Aug '10

16 Aug '10

This was already obsolete whenever I found it. It was version 2.6.31 or something like that. I tried to update it but kept getting ASM errors. I have created new PKGBUILDs based on kernel26-bfs and nvidia-bfs and named kernel26-lqx and nvidia-lqx respectively. I have tested and am using the builds now on my PC for x86_64 and everything is working good. So pretty much this PKGBUILD is obsolete/not working and I have uploaded an undated version using the .configs from liquorix.net project.

2 1

[aur-general] Vacation
by Ike Devolder 16 Aug '10

16 Aug '10

I go on vacation for a week so pls do not orphan my outdated packages :p i will update again on 23 aug, or at least on 24 aug. http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?SeB=m&K=BlackEagle thx Best regards

1 0

[aur-general] Removal request for cross32 stuff
by Mikhail Vorozhtsov 16 Aug '10

16 Aug '10

Hi, TUs. Since my cross32-* packages [1][2][3][4] were adopted into [community], feel free to remove them from AUR. [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31543 [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31547 [3] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31545 [4] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34216

2 1

[aur-general] Package ownership change request qt-git and qtcreator-git
by Bernhard Friedreich 16 Aug '10

16 Aug '10

Hi! Both packages: -) qt-git -) qtcreator-git seem to be unmaintained. I (friesoft) would like to take over maintainership as I've already created new, working versions. Thanks! Best regards, Bernhard Friedreich, friesoft

3 3

[aur-general] Remove kernel-liquorix
by Raul Castillo 16 Aug '10

16 Aug '10

I don't know if previous request went through to remove kernel-liquorix.

2 1

[aur-general] Package removal, ppasskeeper-svn
by Martin Peres 16 Aug '10

16 Aug '10

Hi, The pppaskeeper project has switched from svn to git, making ppasskeeper-svn( http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19471) useless. I'm the owner of this package, could you delete it? I will soon replace it with ppasskeeper-git. Thanks, Martin Peres (Mupuf)

2 1

[aur-general] packages deletion request
by Xavier 15 Aug '10

15 Aug '10

2 1

[aur-general] Orphan request
by Simon Stoakley 15 Aug '10

15 Aug '10

Hi, can you please orphan libtommath [1], so i can adopt ,update etc. Development has recently restarted and I've emailed the current maintainer and had no reply. Thanks Simon -- [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=11500

2 1

[aur-general] AUR libfm removal requests
by Cilyan Olowen 15 Aug '10

15 Aug '10

Hello, Could you please delete these two packages from AUR: libfm [1]: Duplicate as it is provided in extra and outdated. libfm-udisks [2]: Used to provide a version of libfm-git with enable-udisks, but this options was added by default in the original libfm-git package. Thanks! :) [1]: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=36847 [2]: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38777

2 1

Re: [aur-general] aur-general Digest, Vol 70, Issue 13
by Stijn Segers 15 Aug '10

15 Aug '10

> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 20:36:17 +0300 > From: Ionu? B?ru <ibiru(a)archlinux.org> > Subject: Re: [aur-general] TUs adopting packages from the AUR > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> > Message-ID: <4C66D411.7010405(a)archlinux.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > On 08/14/2010 08:22 PM, Xyne wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:43:37 +0300 > > Ionu? B?ru wrote: > > > >> On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote: > >>> Guys, > >>> > >>> When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when > >>> a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR. > >>> > >>> I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages > >>> were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my > >>> packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it. > >>> > >>> Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure > >>> struck me as impolite, rude even. > >>> > >>> Thanks > >> > >> yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you > >> or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our > >> users to easy access their favorite applications. > >> > > > > Is that really how we're supposed to handle it? > > > > In my opinion, a TU should contact the current maintainer in advance to > > discuss moving a package to [community]. Simply taking the package is > > indeed impolite, regardless of the number of votes. > > > > if you read his email, you'll see that an email was sent. > > if the current maintainer doesn't want to be moved, you think that is a > democracy? :D > > is not > > I don't mind seeing packages moved into [community], much to the contrary. But as Xyne said, communication would be nice. If some TU were to ask me 'can I adopt this package and put it in [community]', why would I say no? Why would anyone, for that matter? :-) I'd just like to be noticed before, and not after. Of course it's not a democracy, but communication isn't a synonym of democracy ;-).

4 3