- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[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

[aur-general] Package ownership change request for yaourt-git
by Andrew Crerar 04 Aug '14

04 Aug '14

Hi all, I (andrewSC) would like to request ownership of yaourt-git (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/yaourt-git/) as it's been flagged out-of-date for some time now. Regards, Andrew

6 10