- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Missing Packages
by aur-notify＠archlinux.org 04 May '08

04 May '08

Missing i686 Packages: No new package supplied for scilab 4.1.2-4! -- This is an automated message. If you wish to stop receiving it twice a day, fix the package(s).

3 3

[aur-general] Problem uploading packages on i686
by Allan McRae 04 May '08

04 May '08

Hi all, At the moment the is a problem uploading packages to i686 community. I know this because I have moved a couple of packages to community and the AUR does not reflect this after several hours. Now, I know in the next 12 hours, we will probably get one of those "missing package" emails and fixing that will fix the problem. Then again, it might be one of the duplicate/missing PKGBUILD problems. Surely given I know it is a problem already, then I can fix it! My question is, does the output from the community/AUR integration daemon get posted anywhere visible to us TUs? Cheers, Allan

3 3

[aur-general] Problem uploading packages on i686
by Allan McRae 04 May '08

04 May '08

Hi all, At the moment the is a problem uploading packages to i686 community. I know this because I have moved a couple of packages to community and the AUR does not reflect this after several hours. Now, I know in the next 12 hours, we will probably get one of those "missing package" emails and fixing that will fix the problem. Then again, it might be one of the duplicate/missing PKGBUILD problems. Surely given I know it is a problem already, then I can fix it! My question is, does the output from the community/AUR integration daemon get posted anywhere visible to us TUs? Cheers, Allan

2 1

[aur-general] Problem with tupkg
by DaNiMoTh 04 May '08

04 May '08

Uhm, I have this problem: tupkg doesn't upload. I have this output: [danimoth@jane scilab]$communitypkg {'size0': ['0'], 'numpkgs': ['1'], 'name0': ['scilab-4.1.2-4.pkg.tar.gz']} Uploading: scilab-4.1.2-4.pkg.tar.gz 14394 kb then nothing.. I think the problem is tupkg, but password and username are right. I answer to bash yesterday to upload it and he tells me that he has upload... why it isn't recognised?

1 0

[aur-general] Missing Packages
by aur-notify＠archlinux.org 04 May '08

04 May '08

Missing i686 Packages: No new package supplied for scilab 4.1.2-4! -- This is an automated message. If you wish to stop receiving it twice a day, fix the package(s).

1 0

[aur-general] orphans in community
by Firmicus 02 May '08

02 May '08

Reminder: these are our current orphans in community: awn-extras-applets helixplayer kchmviewer kde-adblock-improvement knetstats man-pages-pt_br openssh-chroot psqlodbc python-geotypes Should they be moved to unsupported? Also, I notice that we have 877 orphans in unsupported (many out-of-date)! Should we remove them eventually? Especially those with very few or no votes? Firmicus

7 10

[aur-general] Pommed initscript
by Jordi Cerdan 02 May '08

02 May '08

Hi, I'm the maintainer of pommed in AUR and I would like to adapt the init daemon script to the Archlinux standard, as user royrocks suggested me. I had a look to the wiki but didn't saw any page conscerning the rules and the way to build an init script adapting to Archlinux rules. Of course, I could build one having a look to other daemons and to the /etc/rc.d/functions script, but I would like to know if there's some kind of documentation I haven't found, so I don't forget anything in the script. Regards, jcerdan

2 2

[aur-general] orphan request : octave3
by Xavier 02 May '08

02 May '08

The last update of this package was on 30/03. That day, cyberdune also offered me to orphan the package, which I accepted, but he didn't do it. And no news since then. In the meantime, the package didn't build anymore because of gcc 4.3, which required a small patch. And then octave 3.0.1 was also released, which includes the fix.

2 2

[aur-general] Missing Packages
by aur-notify＠archlinux.org 02 May '08

02 May '08

Missing x86_64 Packages: No new package supplied for netbeans 6.1-1! -- This is an automated message. If you wish to stop receiving it twice a day, fix the package(s).

3 3

[aur-general] Community64 status again...
by Allan McRae 01 May '08

01 May '08

Hi TUs, I know I keep on about this but I just had a look at the pkg_diff page [1] and I noticed there has been a big increase in the number of differences between the i686 and x86_64 community repos. To put some numbers to this, since the 17th there has been 11 packages added to i686 but not x86_64 and another 29 packages have been updated in i686 but not x86_64. We are now up to 190 differences between the architectures. Taking away the lib32 packages and the known build failures [2] leaves about 80 differences that can be fixed. That is about double the amount in the extra repo and it has more packages in total... How do we fix this? Here is what I propose: 1. If you add a new package to community and can only build for one repo then you must post a message to the list asking for someone to build it for the other. I.e. if you are bringing the package to community, then you are responsible for getting it in both arches. 2. Everyone who does not have access to a x86_64 machine, should get access to the build machine by contacting Aaron. 3. If it is inconvenient to build x86_64 packages on the build box (e.g. because of having to wait on deps to sync) then you should arrange with one of the x86_64 using TU's to do the building for you. What do TU's think about these ideas? I'd like to get some official guidelines out there so I can prod consistent offenders (you know who you are....)! Regards, Allan [1] http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html [2] http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community64_Status

5 9