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

[aur-general] Voting period for Jonathan Conder (PirateJonno)
by Ionuț Bîru 03 Sep '10

03 Sep '10

Hi TUs, the voting period for $subj has begin. http://aur.archlinux.org/tu.php?id=32 -- Ionuț

7 8

[aur-general] Welcome our newest TU, Lukas Jirkovsky (stativ)!
by Thomas Dziedzic 02 Sep '10

02 Sep '10

With a result of 16 votes for yes, 0 votes for no, and 4 votes for abstain. I would like to welcome Lukas Jirkovsky (stativ) as our newest trusted user! Everybody give him a warm welcome! :)

13 16

[aur-general] Voting period for Jakob Gruber (schuay)
by Laurent Carlier 31 Aug '10

31 Aug '10

The discussion period is over, so let start for the voting procedure..... Application for Jakob Gruber http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur- general/2010-August/010254.html My sponsorship message http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur- general/2010-August/010257.html Good luck Jakob! Lordheavy

2 1

[aur-general] Want to submit a PKGBUILD
by 陈文龙 31 Aug '10

31 Aug '10

It is realvnc

4 5

[aur-general] Please remove lib32-glibc from AUR
by Jelle van der Waa 31 Aug '10

31 Aug '10

Currently i maintain lib32-glib, but since the multilib repo is here the awesome dev's already packaged it ;). AUR link http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=15540 Package link http://www.archlinux.org/packages/multilib/x86_64/lib32-glibc/ Btw. thank you dev's for the effort of brining in a multilib repo! -- Jelle van der Waa

3 3

[aur-general] Licenses, GPL3 only
by Philipp 31 Aug '10

31 Aug '10

Hi, I just looked up the GPL notation again. Here's the relevant excerpt from the wiki: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards .. The (L)GPL has many versions and permutations of those versions. For (L)GPL software, the convention is: * (L)GPL - (L)GPLv2 or any later version * (L)GPL2 - (L)GPL2 only * (L)GPL3 - (L)GPL3 or any later version Now besides that this is obviously confusing there's another problem. How would you specify that a program is GPL3 only? Regards, -- Philipp -- "Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan

11 41

[aur-general] Please delete kdemultimedia-pulse
by Jordi De Groof 30 Aug '10

30 Aug '10

The patches are integrated in kde 4.5 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=33668 Thanks

2 1

[aur-general] lib32 deletion request
by Try Again 30 Aug '10

30 Aug '10

Two of the packages I maintain, lib32-tdb and lib32-libcanberra, have been adopted in [multilib]. Can you please delete them from the AUR? Thanks.

3 2

[aur-general] Delete request
by Nathan O 30 Aug '10

30 Aug '10

Can somebody delete libsigcplusplus http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=11338, it seems that libsigcpp1.2 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=11468 is the same Thanks

2 1

[aur-general] PKGBUILD: build() vs package() function
by Nicky726 30 Aug '10

30 Aug '10

Hello, hope I don't get this missplaced, as a quick search didn'd get me any results. When I have a package, which does actually build nothing -- say wine_gecko (a file only needs to be placed to a correct directory) -- I should only have package() function in the PKGBUILD, is that a correct interpretation? Now the makepkg is happy but the AUR complaints. I can workaround that with an empty build() function in that case the AUR is happy but the makepkg complains. So I just put in there a harmless echo and both are happy now. Actually my question is not that much about the correct workarounding, as it is about if I really get the meaning of the build() and package() functions correctly, that is for building build(), for installing package()? Thanx, Nicky. -- Don't it always seem to go That you don't know what you've got Till it's gone (Joni Mitchell)

5 6