- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

Rename AUR package
by Aditya Mahajan 29 Jun '23

29 Jun '23

Hi, I am the maintainer of the AUR package [luametatex](https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/luametatex) which provides the luametatex binary + the context macro package. Recently, a new package named [luametatex](https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/luametatex/) was added to extra, which provides the luametatex binary. I realize now that the name of my AUR package is not appropriate and I should have used a more elaborate name (either context-luametatex or context-lmtx). Is it possible to rename the package? Or should I delete the current package and simply create a new one with a more elaborate name? Thanks, Aditya

3 3

llvm 16.x
by Mohan R 24 Jun '23

24 Jun '23

Hi, What happened to llvm 16.x? It was released three months ago. I tried to update the PKGBUILD locally to 16.x, this is what I got https://paste.rs/9R0Mk This issue should have been prevented if we used Source.tar.gz with a single PKGBUILD and should build different packages from this single source (like clang, lld, llvm, llvm-libs etc). Instead, we have three different PKGBUILD files (one for clang, one for lld, one for llvm+llvm-libs). why? I'm a long time arch user, when I started arch, I loved it because of how easy it was to take an official PKGBUILD file for an upstream project, bump the version and get the latest binaries in a single package, it was fairly simple. Now, lot of upstream projects was split into multiple packages (eg: qemu), I can understand the reason for the qemu package split, at least we have a single PKGBUILD to generate multiple qemu packages but this llvm split with multiple PKGBUILD is not helping us to move forward easily. It is stuck at 15.x. I think this is not supposed to be Arch's way. Thanks, Mohan R

3 4

API for AUR?
by Polarian 21 Jun '23

21 Jun '23

Hello, I am not sure if it exists, but if there is an API for the AUR could someone link me to the documentation on it? I am aware there is an rss feed for package updates, but I want to be able to parse information about a package. I assume there isn't and the only way to do it is to clone the repository and parse the .SRCINFO or PKGBUILD file for the information? Any pointers would be useful. Thanks, -- Polarian GPG signature: 0770E5312238C760 Website: https://polarian.dev JID/XMPP: polarian(a)polarian.dev

7 10

Conflicting go package naming
by Polarian 19 Jun '23

19 Jun '23

Hello, The naming for go packages seems inconsistent, I can see both go-* and golang-* on official and AUR packages, which am I meant to use as go-* seems to be more popular but according to the guidelines golang-* is what is meant to be used. So which should be used? and why are they differing? is either accepted? I do not know which to use, and I don't want to push a new package until I know, sorry for the noise for such a simple question but better do it right the first time, so I don't need to fix it in the future :) Thank you in advance, -- Polarian GPG signature: 0770E5312238C760 Website: https://polarian.dev JID/XMPP: polarian(a)polarian.dev

9 32

package aid - tmpfiles.d problems
by Polarian 15 Jun '23

15 Jun '23

Hello, So I have been attempting to package an irc bot for the aur, because I know a good 3 people or more now who are manually installing it on their arch servers so I decided to attempt to package it. I decided to use gitea as a good reference as it contains the sysusers configuration and also tmpfiles configuration as well. However for some reason when I attempt to adapt it, I get an error, I have not yet pushed the package to the aur and won't until its working so please check it here: https://git.polarian.dev/AUR/irc-uberbot-git I am aware for those rust packagers out there that I have not included "--locked" when fetching the crates, unfortunately upstream has not maintained their dependencies therefore cargo will not build unless "--locked" is removed, I will probably patch this shortly. The following error when I attempt to install this package which I need help in fixing: Detected unsafe path transition /etc/uberbot (owned by uberbot) → /etc/uberbot/config.toml (owned by root) during canonicalization of etc/uberbot/config.toml. error: command failed to execute correctly I do not see why this is happening for me but when I install gitea it works just fine :/ Its probably something really obvious, but I would still appreciate an explanation as I have not worked with tmpfiles very much so I am very naive, so please play nice :P Thanks in advance, -- Polarian GPG signature: 0770E5312238C760 Website: https://polarian.dev JID/XMPP: polarian(a)polarian.dev

6 11

VCS package check - chuncord-git
by Polarian 10 Jun '23

10 Jun '23

Hello, I just want some quick feedback on a package I made a few days ago, this was my first time writing a VCS package, so I want to make sure I have done everything properly: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/chuncord-git Please let me know if I have done anything wrong. Thank you, -- Polarian GPG signature: 0770E5312238C760 Website: https://polarian.dev JID/XMPP: polarian(a)polarian.dev

2 2

Autobot caught in use?
by Polarian 03 Jun '23

03 Jun '23

Hello, I was looking at the AUR today and I have realised a ton of packages with the prefix r-<package name> being updated within a minute of each other, and then found the user to be publishing them: https://aur.archlinux.org/account/BioArchLinuxBot By the name it seems this is a Bot, Anthraxx and Jelle have already discussed how this is not acceptable in a previous thread, see: https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/aur-general@lists.archlinux.org/m… https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/aur-general@lists.archlinux.org/m… A draft has also been submitted on the ArchWiki to set this into stone: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Talk:AUR_submission_guidelines#Automation_… Therefore I am bringing this user, and the packages which this has occurred on to the TUs here. I have also attached an image to this email which is a screenshot of the recently updated packages, you can use the rss feeds to back this up as well, it clearly shows that a large number of r packages were updated BY THE SAME USER within the span of 10 minutes. Let me know what you think :) Have a good day, -- Polarian GPG signature: 0770E5312238C760 Website: https://polarian.dev JID/XMPP: polarian(a)polarian.dev

6 7

Questions on JDK naming
by Tommaso Dordoni 02 Jun '23

02 Jun '23

Hello, I recently started contributing to the AUR and I have some questions on JDK naming. I submitted a package called “jdk17-azul-prime-bin” yesterday, but then I realized that other Zulu jdk packages follow a different naming convention, such as “zulu-8-bin”, “zulu-17-bin”, “zulu-20-bin”... For consistency, I requested a merge to rename my package as “zulu-prime-17-bin”. Was that a good decision? In general, what is the best way to name JDK and JRE packages? For instance, how should I name the JDK and JRE Zulu Prime packages for Java 8 to differentiate them? Thank you

2 1

Harrassment?
by Pellegrino Prevete 13 May '23

13 May '23

the "xiota" aur user, I never talked even once as far as I remember, and who somehow came to maintain "gnome-contact-git", defined me "a squatter who has never pushed an update to packages" in an orphan request. I'm notifying him I have reported the issue here. Cheers

3 2

Binary AUR packages when associated packages exist in the repos
by é 12 May '23

12 May '23

I would like to reopen the discussion to delete a package (yuzu-mainline-bin) that exists in [community] (yuzu). As per AUR guidelines [1]: >The submitted PKGBUILDs must not build applications already in any of >the official binary repositories under any circumstances. Check the >official package database for the package. If any version of it exists, >do not submit the package. If the official package is out-of-date, flag >it as such. If the official package is broken or is lacking a feature, >then please file a bug report. > >Exception to this strict rule may only be packages having extra >features enabled and/or patches in comparison to the official ones. In >such an occasion the pkgname should be different to express that >difference. For example, a package for GNU screen containing the >sidebar patch could be named screen-sidebar. Additionally the >provides=('screen') array should be used in order to avoid conflicts >with the official package. yuzu-mainline-bin provides zero extra features or functionality compared to the repo build, at least, no one has yet mentioned such. The name itself refers to yuzu-mainline which is exactly what the repo package is building. As a result I filed a deletion request, but this was apparently rejected [2] with the reasoning that "Yuzu only seems to support binaries", along with some links to comments from upstream as well as a link to a previous thread [3] on the ML from 2021 where this topic was mentioned before. The other point mentioned in the AUR package comments [4] is that the repo version can be out of date frequently. Again, that is addressed in the quote above, still doesn't justify the AUR package. To me, the entire purpose of having the official repos is to have binary builds (presumably done in a clean environment with some minimal source verification), so we don't have to rely on arbitrary developers to have clean environments and only really need to trust the TUs who build that package. If there are issues with a package, they are first reported to Arch maintainers via bug report (this is in accordance with the "please file a bug report" in the quoted passage above). This applies to any package, and yuzu is neither an exception nor special case here. Also the entire point of having distros in the first place is that you have someone (who is usually not upstream) maintaining the package and making sure it slots well into your system. I don't know of any package in any distro where the distro builds the package, but upstream is expected to support it. So why should a specific -bin package exist in the AUR just because upstream is in accordance with decades of tradition? Either way they clearly do not want unnecessary bug reports from inexperienced users [5], so any Arch user reporting a bug with the repo package upstream would be unhelpful to both Arch and Yuzu. Best, éclairevoyant [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Rules_of_submiss… [2] https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/aur-requests@lists.archlinux.org/… [3] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-dev/2021-December/005056.html [4] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/yuzu-mainline-bin#comment-913540 [5] https://github.com/yuzu-emu/yuzu/blob/master/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_rep…

4 4