September 2022 - Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] TU rename Bylaws amendment vote
by Konstantin Gizdov 25 Oct '23

25 Oct '23

Hi, As per the TU Bylaws following the discussion to rename the Truster Users [1], the Trusted Users themselves must vote to approve the renaming. Hence, please, cast your vote on whether you agree the Bylaws be amended and the "Trusted User" role is renamed into "Package Maintainer". Vote is located at - https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/140 -- Regards, Konstantin [1] - https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/7

2 6

Lost account
by Nielzsen 26 Sep '22

26 Sep '22

Hi, I deleted the gmail address linked to my AUR account "Nielzsen" (which is roman.brasseur(a)gmail.com). Is there a way to recover it despite my mistake? Regards.

2 2

May be http://mirroir.wptheme.fr/archlinux/$repo/os/$arch is failing
by marnout 20 Sep '22

20 Sep '22

Hello every body, I had problems with the updates. For some weeks pacman told me everything is up to date, there is nothing to do. So, I commented the first mirror (http://mirroir.wptheme.fr/archlinux/$repo/os/$arch) and then I had 116 packages to update. Maybe this mirror is failing. For me the problem is solved. Friendly. N.B. Sorry if my English is not good, I do not speak English, but a little. -- Mourad Arnout 25 rue de la Vieille Pierre 79800 Exoudun http://arad.free.fr https://github.com/marnout

2 2

RFC / RFO: Extra (CI) files in AUR packages
by Knut Ahlers 16 Sep '22

16 Sep '22

Hey there, I'd like to fetch some comments / opinions regarding maintaining AUR packages with the help of automated build systems. I do maintain several packages in the AUR containing the typical files as `PKGBUILD`, `.SRCINFO`, files referenced in the `source()` section and a special script `update-version.sh`. This script is not mentioned in the PKGBUILD and not used during the build process. It contains the required steps to figure out the latest version of the package and to patch the PKGBUILD. This script is a) used to document how the package is updated and b) is used by my CI system (atm Jenkins) to check for updates and update the package. (Extra steps to verify the package is still building fine before doing any update are common to all packages and are executed after this package-specific script.) For most of my packages there were no complaints about this and users seem to be happy to get the updates usually delivered within an hour after release. Though in one package (librespeed-cli) I got two comments asking me to remove that script. Now I found no explicit statement in the package / AUR submission guidelines against this. Therefore I'd like to ask other maintainers / TUs for your opinions: Are you strictly against adding a script which documents / is used for the update? Is it fine to keep it there? Shall it be removed though doing no harm? Cheers Knut -- Knut Ahlers Software & Infrastructure Developer Web & Blog: https://ahlers.me/ GPG-Key: 0xD215AD7D (https://knut.in/gpg)

2 1

Re: [aur-general] Why was xenia-git orphaned immeditately?
by Sandy Carter 11 Sep '22

11 Sep '22

Glad to hear it wasn't intentional. I find it very strange indeed that the system accepted the request. I don't remember it being flagged OOD but that's on me. Would you mind orphaning xenia-git so I can pick it up again? It would require some rebasing of the patch branches. On Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 7:36 PM Alessandro Marchioro < marciozgaming(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, I had the same question, I was trying to get an update to the package > without orphaning but by clicking the link it was automatically orphaned by > the system in no time, instead of respecting the time as per the page > suggestion, is this because it was out of date for over a year? > > I wasn't trying to get access as a maintainer other than make it build > again with a simple patch of the PKGBUILD, due to the fact that I was > trying out the emulator with the latest builds on Arch and saw it on a bad > state. > > I too wanna be sure that you are the maintainer, it wasn't my intention in > being the one for this package. > > Hope you'll understand, > > Alessandro > Il 12 set 2022, 01:30 +0200, Sandy Carter <bwrsandman(a)gmail.com>, ha > scritto: > > Hello, > > I used to maintain xenia-git [1] and have since its creation. I am also > the author of the Linux threading, windowing, debug and other patches that > the package uses. > > At *19:20:00 UTC* today, an orphan request was submitted and immediately > orphaned by user ilbuonmarcio. The user made no attempt to contact me about > the issue either by email or in the comments. If they had, I would have > responded as I usually do to issues in my packages. > > I am active on AUR and have been for over 10 years now. I usually can fix > a package issue in a day to a week. > > According to the arch wiki: > > Orphan requests will be granted after two weeks if the current > maintainer did not react > > I was not given the time to react as it is now a few hours later. > > I would like to request this orphaning be undone and steps can be taken to > avoid this happening again. > > Thank you, > -- > Sandy > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xenia-git > >

1 0

[aur-general] Why was xenia-git orphaned immeditately?
by Sandy Carter 11 Sep '22

11 Sep '22

Hello, I used to maintain xenia-git [1] and have since its creation. I am also the author of the Linux threading, windowing, debug and other patches that the package uses. At *19:20:00 UTC* today, an orphan request was submitted and immediately orphaned by user ilbuonmarcio. The user made no attempt to contact me about the issue either by email or in the comments. If they had, I would have responded as I usually do to issues in my packages. I am active on AUR and have been for over 10 years now. I usually can fix a package issue in a day to a week. According to the arch wiki: > Orphan requests will be granted after two weeks if the current maintainer did not react I was not given the time to react as it is now a few hours later. I would like to request this orphaning be undone and steps can be taken to avoid this happening again. Thank you, -- Sandy [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xenia-git

1 0

[aur-general] Compiling with CMake
by Guilhem Saurel 08 Sep '22

08 Sep '22

Hi, In AUR, there are many packages with an old-school > mkdir build && cd build > cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr .. > make Other packages say they require ninja and use > mkdir build && cd build > cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr -G Ninja .. > ninja But I think we should let the end user choose if they want make or ninja, by letting them configure their CMAKE_GENERATOR environment variable¹ Currently if someone has CMAKE_GENERATOR=Ninja in their environment, many AUR packages in the first category will fail, because eg.: > […] > -- Configuring done > -- Generating done > -- Build files have been written to: /home/nim/.cache/paru/clone/octomap/src/octomap-1.9.8/octomap/build > make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop. And on the other hand for the second case, packages say they require ninja while they would work as well with make. Therefore I think we should ask CMake to compile, no matter which generator is available on the machine and/or was chosen by the user, with: > mkdir build && cd build > cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr .. > cmake --build . Or even better > cmake -B build -S . -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr > cmake --build build Any opinions ? Should we put that on the wiki² ? Or write an RFC, like ³ ? Cheers ! Guilhem, aka. Nim65s ¹: https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/envvar/CMAKE_GENERATOR.html ²: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/CMake_package_guidelines ³: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/10

2 2

[aur-general] TU Application - blakkheim
by T.J. Townsend 06 Sep '22

06 Sep '22

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hello. I'd like to apply to become a trusted user. I started using Arch around 2009 when we still had the curses installer, rc.conf, hal... the good old days. I left at some point and came back as a full-time user about three years ago. You can find me on IRC under the name blakkheim, usually in #archlinux-security since that's my main area of interest. I'm the maintainer or co-maintainer for a few OpenBSD-derived packages in the AUR: openiked, rpki-client, and openbgpd. I've been involved with OpenBSD since 2014 and became a project committer there in early 2016. In the last two years I've submitted just over 150 patches to the Arch bug tracker: https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?opened=32638&status[]= Some community packages I'd like to co-maintain are openntpd, opensmtpd, libressl, sndio, mandoc, signify, dnscrypt-proxy, bmake, scrot, firejail, xcalib, mktorrent, parallel, ncmpcpp... And more (frankly, lots more) in the core/extra repos if that option opens up in the future. I keep up with many software projects via their mailing lists and RSS/atom feeds. If I'm accepted, one of my goals will be to get missing security fixes into Arch's repository shortly after their upstream release. The sponsors of my application are dvzrv, kpcyrd, and anthraxx. (yep, three) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYIAB0WIQRUwf0nM2HqUUojd5Pylr3lA2jGzgUCYvuMwwAKCRDylr3lA2jG zvh9AQDOvEQbJdu3vfoPUY+Q+amtiwOatfD7nHje2XcviXF82gD/SL2aw0SNm9/Q sxcT+MltS0EoPTyR+OwOU9lHkpyuFQw= =4mzL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

9 16

[aur-general] My package is being flagged as out-of-date falsely by a specific user repeatedly
by Reza Jahanbakhshi 06 Sep '22

06 Sep '22

Hi, This user https://aur.archlinux.org/account/bittin is flagging https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mesa-git as out-of-date repeatedly. I asked him not to do so in the package page comments section. I also tried to email him directly and explained to him that this is a git package and it's not necessary to update it with every version. But, the package is still being flagged. What should I do? Thanks,

2 1