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
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.
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.frhttps://github.com/marnout
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)
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
>
>
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
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
-----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-----
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,