- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

Re: [aur-general] ArchLinux TU Application: Fabio Castelli (Muflone)
by Johannes Löthberg 13 Aug '14

13 Aug '14

You might also want to look into having your mail client set proper Message-ID and In-Reply-To headers. Not having them breaks threading completely in many mail clients. -- Sincerely, Johannes Löthberg PGP Key ID: 3A9D0BB5

1 0

Re: [aur-general] ArchLinux TU Application: Fabio Castelli (Muflone)
by "P. A. López-Valencia" 13 Aug '14

13 Aug '14

On 13/08/14 08:48, Fabio Castelli wrote: >> Sorry for off-topic, but Fabio, are you aware that your email address is >> in a spam blacklist? > Hello > > I wasn't aware at all about the blacklist from lashback. Unfortunately my mailboxes are hosted in a shared host, most probably some users from that host has made spam so lashback has listed the source IP as spam source. > > All my email addresses are really old and I wouldn't want change them so I'll try to fix the source of the problem with the maintainer. > > If you have useful suggests to solve the trouble please let me know in some way. > I've dealt with this kind of issue in the past and the first two measures that you can implement are a) SPF records and b) DKIM signing. All is published in TXT DNS records. The only downside of DKIM is that there are signing facilities for sendmail and postfix only AFAIK and you seem to prefer exim4. After you have these measures in place it will be much easier to have your domain cleared up. Even if the IP address is shared, the SPF records are exclusive to the context of your domain.

2 1

Re: [aur-general] ArchLinux TU Application: Fabio Castelli (Muflone)
by Fabio Castelli 13 Aug '14

13 Aug '14

> Sorry for off-topic, but Fabio, are you aware that your email address is > in a spam blacklist? Hello I wasn't aware at all about the blacklist from lashback. Unfortunately my mailboxes are hosted in a shared host, most probably some users from that host has made spam so lashback has listed the source IP as spam source. All my email addresses are really old and I wouldn't want change them so I'll try to fix the source of the problem with the maintainer. If you have useful suggests to solve the trouble please let me know in some way. Thank you for reporting that. Bye -- Muflone

1 0

[aur-general] ArchLinux TU Application: Fabio Castelli (Muflone)
by Muflone 13 Aug '14

13 Aug '14

Hi everyone My name's Fabio Castelli (aka Muflone) from Italy and I wish to apply to become a TU for ArchLinux to maintain some packages in the community repository. My TU sponsor is György Balló. I actually work as a software developer in a local private company and I use GNU/Linux since the 1998, having started with Slackware 2.0. Many years have passed through Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu and finally ArchLinux that actually I use daily at home and at my job place since a couple of years. Debian is still often used for software packaging, to deploy services in my network and for less experienced colleagues that needs some GNU/Linux environment in my job place. My experience in development is long term, starting in '80s with C=64 Basic, actually I work daily in Python (under Windows, GNU/Linux and i5/OS, both desktop, server and web platforms), Delphi and VB (under Windows), RPG/400 and CL (under i5/OS) and many other things which I use less often, like C or J2EE. My open source contributions are a really long list but let's try to not be boring: - maintainer for over 160 packages in the AUR, most of them updated often: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?SeB=m&K=Muflone https://github.com/muflone/pkgbuilds/ - maintainer for some Debian packages: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=muflone@vbsimple.net https://alioth.debian.org/projects/python-apps/ - author of various open source softwares: http://www.muflone.com/english.html https://github.com/muflone/ https://code.google.com/u/102825094329389897213/ https://www.openhub.net/accounts/Muflone - written hundreds of articles for an Italian website around VB6 development through the 1998 and 2004: http://www.vbsimple.net/ - written hundreds of articles for an Italian website around Ubuntu through the 2009 and the 2011: http://ubuntrucchi.wordpress.com/ - support in the Italian Ubuntu forum, I was the second most active member of the forum through the 2009 and the 2012: http://forum.ubuntu-it.org/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=73229 - support and founder of LQH (Linux Quality Help), an Italian GNU/Linux forum where normal users could ask their questions and only the experts group could offer support, resulting in higher quality service, ran only from highly experienced users through the 2009 and the 2012: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.linuxqualityhelp.it/supporto - written tenth of Italian video guides around PyGTK development through the 2008 and the 2010: http://pygtk.wordpress.com/ - written a couple of articles around GNOME Shell in the 2011: http://gnomeshell.wordpress.com/ - could continue but better stopping here.. too boring. I'm sorry! ArchLinux is actually my favorite GNU/Linux distributions and I think I could do a lot of work in enhancing this great distribution. What I love about ArchLinux is the perfect control it gives to me and it needs from me. Every time I need some software, I package it and then I publish it under AUR. I try to apply an old Microsoft rule: "Never ever write the same thing twice", so if the software resulted useful to me then it could be useful for other users and AUR is a perfect place where to find stuff. There are a lot of packages that I wish to move in the community repository: hfsprogs, kompozer, sweethome3d, gmtp, arista, spyder/spyder3, sbackup, gwakeonlan, gespeaker, remmina-plugin-*, python-ptrace. There are also packages maintained from other users that I wish to see in community repository: dex2jar, dmg2img, firefox-theme-adwaita and thunderbird-theme-adwaita, gigolo, gscan2pdf, httrack, linkchecker, loggedfs, netactview, pacmanlogviewer, parallel-python, pyrenamer. I read daily the AUR general and AUR requests mailing lists but I never participate in the discussions, after many years of discussions in other ML and forums I lost the pleasure in writing stuff inside the communities. The same applies to IRC, too much time spent in helping others (I was also HelpOp in #irchelp) forced me to away even from IRC. My job coincided with my favorite hobby so, apart my personal projects (see GitHub) I love reading heavy books (technical, development, sysadmin, networking but also theater or classic novels) and watching films when the TV is not owned by my gf. Thank you for reading up to here. Best regards Fabio Castelli / Muflone

8 12

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 13 Aug '14

13 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 4 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 20 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) == * ibus-skk-1.4.1.20140813-1 (i686) * libskk-1.0.1-3 (i686) * ibus-skk-1.4.1.20140813-1 (x86_64) * libskk-1.0.1-3 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (20 total) == * aegisub-3.2.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * electricsheep-2.7b33-17 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * erlang-17.1-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * filezilla-3.9.0.2-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * ibus-skk-1.4.1.20140813-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libskk-1.0.1-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * mediainfo-gui-0.7.69-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * poedit-1.6.7-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * springlobby-0.196-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * wxcam-1.1-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * aegisub-3.2.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * electricsheep-2.7b33-17 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * erlang-17.1-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * filezilla-3.9.0.2-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * ibus-skk-1.4.1.20140813-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * libskk-1.0.1-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * mediainfo-gui-0.7.69-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * poedit-1.6.7-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * springlobby-0.196-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wxcam-1.1-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. eric - 2 signoffs 2. bisson - 2 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 12 Aug '14

12 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 16 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 30 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (16 total) == * aegisub-3.2.0-2 (i686) * electricsheep-2.7b33-17 (i686) * erlang-17.1-2 (i686) * filezilla-3.9.0.2-1 (i686) * mediainfo-gui-0.7.69-2 (i686) * poedit-1.6.7-2 (i686) * springlobby-0.196-2 (i686) * wxcam-1.1-6 (i686) * aegisub-3.2.0-2 (x86_64) * electricsheep-2.7b33-17 (x86_64) * erlang-17.1-2 (x86_64) * filezilla-3.9.0.2-1 (x86_64) * mediainfo-gui-0.7.69-2 (x86_64) * poedit-1.6.7-2 (x86_64) * springlobby-0.196-2 (x86_64) * wxcam-1.1-6 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (30 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * aegisub-3.2.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * electricsheep-2.7b33-17 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * erlang-17.1-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * filezilla-3.9.0.2-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * mediainfo-gui-0.7.69-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * poedit-1.6.7-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * springlobby-0.196-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * wxcam-1.1-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * aegisub-3.2.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * electricsheep-2.7b33-17 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * erlang-17.1-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * filezilla-3.9.0.2-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * mediainfo-gui-0.7.69-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * poedit-1.6.7-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * springlobby-0.196-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wxcam-1.1-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. allan - 7 signoffs 2. eric - 4 signoffs 3. thestinger - 3 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Brother packages and some others
by Berno Strik 11 Aug '14

11 Aug '14

Hello all, Since i'm leaving Arch for Porteus I will be disowning my AUR-packages within the next hour so that other people can take ownership. I've always enjoyed Arch and the community, keep up the good work. Aur maintainer "libernux"

1 0

[aur-general] Inactive TU -- Federico Cinelli
by Lukas Fleischer 11 Aug '14

11 Aug '14

Hi, since it was mentioned on IRC: It looks like Federico Cinelli is inactive and should be brought up for special removal according to [1]. We usually try not to be overly pedantic with these rules, but Federico has been MIA for a long time now: * Last SVN commit on 2013-12-04. * Did not send a mail to the mailing lists for ~6 months. * Inactive on the AUR (there are orphan requests for his packages). * Inactive on the bug tracker. * Inactive on IRC. I sent him an email a couple of days ago but didn't receive a reply. Hope he is doing well! Let the discussion period begin, the voting period will start on 2014-08-05. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html#_special_removal_of_an…

1 2

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 11 Aug '14

11 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 0 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 14 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (14 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. thomas - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Discussion about AUR packages signing
by Fabien Dubosson 11 Aug '14

11 Aug '14

Hi, I want to start a discussion about AUR packages signing. If this debate already happened, it means that I'm not really good with Google or unfortunate in the keywords I used in my searches: in these cases forgive me and just give me some pointers. TL;DR I personally "trust" some AUR users who have several good-quality packages, and an optional way to sign AUR packages would permit me to know that I can build and update their packages without worrying too much. Let me introduce my thoughts by explaining the context: when I need an application, I start by looking at the official packages. If it is not existing, I continue by looking in AUR, and eventually if there is no corresponding packages there I wrote my own PKGBUILD and share it. I think this is the most common workflow for arch users. If there is the need to build packages from AUR, preferences differs more between people. Some likes to use AUR-helpers, others try to avoid using unsupported packages, and a last group always build AUR PKGBUILD manually. Official and own-made packages can be used (more-or-less) safely. AUR packages need to be used with precautions, because they come from untrusted users and can be potentially dangerous. Actually this is one of the reason why some people are not using AUR-helpers and prefer to build packages manually. People that avoid to use unsupported packages are not concerned by this discussion, so I'll skip them. People that are building packages manually are doing so mainly to deeply check packages they install, so they must not be very interested with AUR package signing (or maybe are they?). I will then focus on people (like me) that use an AUR-helper in their workflow. I always read PKGBUILDs the first time that I want to install one of them in one of my computers (work, home, laptop). When a new version is released, my AUR-helper will ask me to update it, but after the second or third time I see that the package is well-written, I don't want to look every time at the PKGBUILD, patches and *.install files. In some sense, I start to "trust" to the package owner. With AUR-helpers it is easy to skip this part and just build the packages, but there is a drawback: the package owner can change. The problem with this situation is if the package is orphaned and a new owner start to maintain it, it would not be noticeable. This is where package signing in AUR would be very useful. You give your trust to some users who maintain several good-quality packages. And as long as you build packages signed by those users, you know you are safe to update them without looking at sources. It would also offers some other warranties: no usurpation of maintainer work, no corruption in case of AUR website weakness, etc. Also the solution can be quite simple: The `*.src.tar.gz` can be signed by the owner and the signature file can be uploaded to AUR, next to the source aurball. Later, both files can be downloaded by the user or the AUR-helper and verified with gpg. The rest of the logic must be implemented in AUR-helpers. Some other remarks: - It differs from the notion of TU because the goal is not to give a keyring of trust-able people to all users, but only to permit users who want to trust personally some AUR maintainers to do so. - Of course this doesn't prevent corruption of upstream sources nor offers perfect security. But it is better than nothing, and can potentially focus some unnoticed maintainer changes. - I read some times ago that the goal is to move from AUR to git one day. In this case signing the `*.src.tar.gz` would not be possible and a more complex solution will maybe be needed. Is something like this envisaged? What are your thoughts about this subject? Regards, ++ Fabien

7 11

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 10 Aug '14

10 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 0 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 14 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (14 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. lfleischer - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 09 Aug '14

09 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 0 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 14 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (14 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Delete Request
by sxe 08 Aug '14

08 Aug '14

The maintainer switched to GIT only so i renamed the package. Please delete: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/kdestyle-kvantum-kde4/ Thanks, Andy

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 08 Aug '14

08 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 2 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 16 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (2 total) == * libgit2-1:0.21.1-1 (i686) * libgit2-1:0.21.1-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (16 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libgit2-1:0.21.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * libgit2-1:0.21.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. fyan - 6 signoffs 2. foutrelis - 4 signoffs 3. eric - 4 signoffs 4. ronald - 2 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] name change for libreoffice-rpm to libreoffice-fresh-rpm
by Mark Lee 07 Aug '14

07 Aug '14

Salutations, I'd like to request a name change from libreoffice-rpm to libreoffice-fresh-rpm for my package. Regards, Mark

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 07 Aug '14

07 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 0 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 16 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (16 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. bisson - 9 signoffs 2. lcarlier - 4 signoffs 3. lfleischer - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] virtualbox-extension-pack vs. virtualbox-ext-oracle
by Christian Hesse 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

Hello everybody, following a lengthy discussion sublu just deleted my package virtualbox-extension-pack from AUR. This is what his package (virtualbox-ext-oracle) does: * Install an archive file. * Use install script to copy a number of files to /usr without pacman knowing about it. I think this is the wrong way, so I created my own package (virtualbox-extension-pack) that tries to get it right: * Just install the files required, "ready to use" for virtualbox. * No crappy install script required! My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more if more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of comments that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files to /usr with pacman or the install script. Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via AUR. But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there? -- main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH" "CX:;",b;for(a/* Chris get my mail address: */=0;b=c[a++];) putchar(b-1/(/* gcc -o sig sig.c && ./sig */b/42*2-3)*42);}

6 7

[aur-general] Backdoors in packages
by Florian Bruhin 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

Hi, I personally check PKGBUILDs before installing, but I know of many people who don't. This made me wonder: How many (if any) cases of actual malice (backdoors, removing data, other nasty stuff) are/were actually in the wild? Florian -- http://www.the-compiler.org | me(a)the-compiler.org (Mail/XMPP) GPG 0xFD55A072 | http://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc I love long mails! | http://email.is-not-s.ms/

4 4

[aur-general] Package maintenance
by Justin Dray 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

Hi, The issue I've got at the moment is in regards to a poorly packaged package that is also providing files made by other packages? The one in question I've also suggested the fixes to the maintainer, and requested it be orphaned when it was not updated for several months. Within a day the maintainer bumped the version up but didn't fix any other issues. I'm not fussed about being the maintainer or not, I just want the packages that I use to work correctly. Regards, Justin Dray E: justin(a)dray.be M: 0433348284

2 2

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 0 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 16 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (16 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. foutrelis - 12 signoffs 2. lfleischer - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] no LLDP tools in [extra] or [community] :-/
by Ido Rosen 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

There's a PKGBUILD for ladvd and lldpd in AUR currently, these are important networking tools in data center environments. Can someone please promote at least one of them to [community] or ideally [extra]? They're not high on votes, but I think this should be an exception since not many people are using Arch in data center environments anyhow that would need them and would thus vote on them. They both implement LLDP daemons.

3 6

[aur-general] TU resignation.
by Peter Lewis 06 Aug '14

06 Aug '14

Hi all, I had hoped it wouldn't come to this, but based on mounting evidence, I've come to the conclusion that I should resign as a TU. Most of you probably already forgot I was here, and I'm sorry that I just haven't been able to keep on top of things and participate lately. A lot has happened with me over the last year: became a father, got a new job, moved house... and I'm realising that my life has changed such that I haven't found time to keep up with Arch / TU duties. I'm still a day-to-day Archer at work and home, and don't see that changing any time. And it's great to have been part of such a talented and welcoming team. Thanks to all of you for the effort you put in to keeping Arch the great distribution it is. Cheers, Pete.

6 6

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 4 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 18 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) == * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (18 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * arm-none-eabi-gdb-7.8-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * arm-none-eabi-gdb-7.8-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.038.00-10 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. bpiotrowski - 2 signoffs 2. anatolik - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 04 Aug '14

04 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 12 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 17 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (12 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-4 (i686) * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-4 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (17 total) == * perl-extutils-config-0.008-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * arm-none-eabi-gdb-7.8-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-11 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * arm-none-eabi-gdb-7.8-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dd_rescue-1.45-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r1-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-52 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140629-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.14-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Moving noip from [community] to AUR
by Alexander Rødseth 04 Aug '14

04 Aug '14

Hi, Some time ago I adopted the noip package. It's a GPL client that connects to what seems to be a commercial service offered by no-ip.com. The free service offered by them has a hostname that expires every 30 days. I am a bit surprised that this was an official package in the first place. When asking for opinions on IRC, there was support for moving the noip package to AUR. In addition to this, there seems to be several alternative clients, with slightly different versioning schemes. Both here: http://www.noip.com/download?page=linux and here: http://onevista.com/noip2.html. This confusion generated a low volume of out-of-date flags. It just smells bad. Moving it. -- Best regards, Alexander Rødseth / xyproto

3 4