- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 27 Aug '14

27 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 * 8 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) == * lxpanel-0.7.0-1 (i686) * virtualbox-4.3.14-4 (i686) * lxpanel-0.7.0-1 (x86_64) * virtualbox-4.3.14-4 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (8 total) == * lxpanel-0.7.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * python-matplotlib-1.4.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-4.3.14-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lxpanel-0.7.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * python-matplotlib-1.4.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-4.3.14-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. thomas - 2 signoffs 2. fyan - 2 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 6 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.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (6 total) == * android-tools-4.4.4_r2.0.1-1 (i686) * ndisc6-1.0.2-8 (i686) * python-matplotlib-1.4.0-1 (i686) * android-tools-4.4.4_r2.0.1-1 (x86_64) * ndisc6-1.0.2-8 (x86_64) * python-matplotlib-1.4.0-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (14 total) == * android-tools-4.4.4_r2.0.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dnscrypt-proxy-1.4.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libsodium-0.7.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * ndisc6-1.0.2-8 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * python-matplotlib-1.4.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * zeromq-4.0.4-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * android-tools-4.4.4_r2.0.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * dnscrypt-proxy-1.4.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * libsodium-0.7.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * ndisc6-1.0.2-8 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * python-matplotlib-1.4.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * zeromq-4.0.4-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] sunpinyin/sunpinyin-data packages pulled back from [community-testing]
by Felix Yan 25 Aug '14

25 Aug '14

The sunpinyin/sunpinyin-data 2.0.3.20140820-1 (new release from open-gram project) packages are having issues on candidate list ordering, I've removed them from [community-testing]. Please downgrade the two packages if you had them installed from [community- testing]. Regards, Felix Yan

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 25 Aug '14

25 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 6 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 13 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 (6 total) == * dnscrypt-proxy-1.4.0-2 (i686) * libsodium-0.7.0-1 (i686) * zeromq-4.0.4-4 (i686) * dnscrypt-proxy-1.4.0-2 (x86_64) * libsodium-0.7.0-1 (x86_64) * zeromq-4.0.4-4 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (13 total) == * sunpinyin-data-1:2.0.3.20140820-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * dnscrypt-proxy-1.4.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libsodium-0.7.0-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * minetest-0.4.10-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * zeromq-4.0.4-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * dnscrypt-proxy-1.4.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * libsodium-0.7.0-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * minetest-0.4.10-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * zeromq-4.0.4-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 24 Aug '14

24 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 * 7 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) == * minetest-0.4.10-4 (i686) * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (i686) * minetest-0.4.10-4 (x86_64) * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (7 total) == * sunpinyin-data-1:2.0.3.20140820-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * minetest-0.4.10-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * minetest-0.4.10-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * pppd-ldap-0.12b-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. thomas - 3 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 23 Aug '14

23 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 * 10 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) == * minetest-0.4.10-3 (i686) * minetest-0.4.10-3 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (10 total) == * avr-libc-1.8.1-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-data-1:2.0.3.20140820-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * minetest-0.4.10-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * minetest-0.4.10-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. bisson - 4 signoffs 2. andyrtr - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] re-submission of onionshare
by simon.hanna＠serve-me.info 22 Aug '14

22 Aug '14

Hi, today I wanted to install onionshare. It's website only listed ways to install using deb and rpm files. So I searched the AUR. I didn't find anything but I came across a deletion request. In this request the maintainer wanted to remove all reference of him from the package. The result was that the whole PKGBUILD was removed from AUR. I found the PKGBUILD in the AUR's git repo, added myself as a maintainer and would publish it again. Is that OK? Since it would be my first submitted PKGBUILD it would be nice, if you could tell me if I could do anything better. Here are two versions one using the latest git commit [1] and the other using the latest release [2]. Should I submit both, or just one of them. If only one, then which one is "better"? cheers,Simon [1] http://sprunge.us/NgaR[2] http://sprunge.us/IagK

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 22 Aug '14

22 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 * 8 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] (8 total) == * avr-libc-1.8.1-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-data-1:2.0.3.20140820-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Maintenance issues with metasploit-git package
by 21 Aug '14

21 Aug '14

I'd like to bring the community's attention to the following package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/metasploit-git/ It has multiple issues and does not follow pkgbuild guidelines and best practices: 1. The build script appends instructions into user-specific and shell-specific ~/.bash_profile on build time. 2. It dumps everything into /usr/local. This is against the very first point in https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards#Package_etiqu… 3. The post-install script tells the user to ignore a warning about breakage. It warns about breaking ruby for all other users when the instruction is run with root permissions. I haven't tested this one for obvious reasons. 4. The package appends to $PATH which overshadows the binaries of latest ruby package with those of 1.9 version for the current user (via same instruction as 1.). The current maintainer refuses collaboration. What's the best I can do in a situation like this? - Babken Vardanyan (axper)

4 4

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 21 Aug '14

21 Aug '14

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 8 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 8 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 (8 total) == * avr-libc-1.8.1-1 (any) * sunpinyin-data-1:2.0.3.20140820-1 (any) * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (i686) * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (i686) * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (i686) * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (x86_64) * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (x86_64) * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (8 total) == * avr-libc-1.8.1-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-data-1:2.0.3.20140820-1 (any) 0/2 signoffs * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * avr-gcc-4.9.1-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * avr-gdb-7.8-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * sunpinyin-2.0.3.20140820-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. foutrelis - 4 signoffs 2. anatolik - 1 signoffs

1 0