- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] libhugetlbfs: transfer of ownership
by Anatol Pomozov 04 Nov '13

04 Nov '13

Hi I would like get ownership of libhugetlbfs AUR package. The owner email does not exist, and the package is out-of-date. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libhugetlbfs/ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Anatol Pomozov <anatol.pomozov(a)gmail.com> Date: Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:30 PM Subject: libhugetlbfs: transfer of ownership To: uergen.bre(a)gmail.com Hi, I see that you are the maintainer of this package https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libhugetlbfs/ I would like to get the ownership and keep improving/fix and update it.

2 1

[aur-general] Backslash to split lines in `depends` array
by Fabien Dubosson 03 Nov '13

03 Nov '13

Hi, I was trying to update my AUR packages with `aura` [1] † and get the following error: aura >>= Determining dependencies... aura >>= Dependency checking failed for these reasons: The dependency `\` could not be found. You may need to search for a package to satisfy it. This is due to the following lines in `octave-hg` [2] PKGBUILD: depends=('fftw>=3.2.2' 'curl' 'fltk' 'hdf5' 'glpk' 'arpack' 'gl2ps' \ 'qrupdate' 'qscintilla' 'qhull' 'graphicsmagick' 'java-environment') The problem doesn't seem to appear with `yaourt` [3] . So before filling a bug request to `aura`, I wanted to be sure that it is allowed/common to use `\` to split lines in the `depends` array? If it is not the case, I will post a comment on the `octave-hg` AUR page to ask to remove the backslash. † Also tested with `aura-git`, the problem still exists. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/aura/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/octave-hg/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/yaourt/ Best regards, Fabien

6 6

[aur-general] Delete requests: libfm-qt / libfm-qt-git
by Jerome Leclanche 03 Nov '13

03 Nov '13

For the time being, the library is not available standalone and is shipped as part of pcmanfm-qt. I'll reupload it once it's been split off. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libfm-qt/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libfm-qt-git/ J. Leclanche

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 03 Nov '13

03 Nov '13

=== 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 * 6 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] (6 total) == * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libpinyin-0.9.94-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * wvstreams-4.6.1-7 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * libpinyin-0.9.94-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wvstreams-4.6.1-7 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Request Remove: lua52-socket
by SpinFlo 02 Nov '13

02 Nov '13

Hi please remove https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lua52-socket/ this package is include in [community] greetings

2 1

[aur-general] PKGBUILD for zetacoin-qt-git
by Bruno Jimenez 02 Nov '13

02 Nov '13

Hi, I have been interested lately in alt-currency and I wanted to try zetacoin, but I couldn't find a package in the repos or the AUR. So, using terracoin-qt's PKGBUILD (which is outdated, by the way) I have created the PKGBUILD for zetacoin-qt-git. As it is the first PKGBUILD I make, I wanted to make sure that it is well written. Thanks in Advance! Bruno P.S: Maybe tomorrow, I'll make also the zetacoin-daemon-git PKGBUILD in case you want to advice me on something

3 9

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 02 Nov '13

02 Nov '13

=== 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 * 6 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] (6 total) == * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libpinyin-0.9.94-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * wvstreams-4.6.1-7 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * libpinyin-0.9.94-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wvstreams-4.6.1-7 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Support for source mirror lists in PKGBUILD
by Ido Rosen 02 Nov '13

02 Nov '13

Hi everyone, What's the current recommended way to support multiple mirrors for the same source file in a PKGBUILD? For example, I have xyz-123.tar.gz that can be downloaded from any of "http://a.example.com/xyz-123.tar.gz" " http://b.example.com/xyz-123.tar.gz" "http://c.example.com/xyz-123.tar.gz"...but one of these may be down at any given time. If there's no support for this in the sources array itself, we should strongly consider adding it. For example, an ad-hoc way: _pick_source_mirror() { # ... do something smart in here } source=( "xyz-123::$(_pick_source_mirror( http://a.example.com/xyz-123.tar.gz http://b.example.com/xyz-123.tar.gz http://c.example.com/xyz-123.tar.gz ))" ) A less ad-hoc way: source() { #...some code that returns a list of URLs/files } Another way: source=(...files without mirrors as usual...) sourcemirrored=( xyz-123::($mirroraURL $mirrorbURL $mirrorcURL) ) Mirrored sources seem like a common enough phenomenon that it's worth special treatment to make the source PKGBUILD variable more versatile if they're not currently supported. Thoughts? Ido

6 18

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 01 Nov '13

01 Nov '13

=== 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 * 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 (2 total) == * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (i686) * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (14 total) == * aqbanking-5.0.25-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * homebank-4.5.4-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * kmymoney-4.6.4-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * libpinyin-0.9.94-1 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * skrooge-1.8.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * wvstreams-4.6.1-7 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * aqbanking-5.0.25-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * fcitx-mozc-1.12.1599.102-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * homebank-4.5.4-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * kmymoney-4.6.4-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * libpinyin-0.9.94-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * skrooge-1.8.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wvstreams-4.6.1-7 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. andyrtr - 2 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Revise VCS packages versioning
by Anatol Pomozov 01 Nov '13

01 Nov '13

Hi I would like to discuss VCS package versioning that is described here https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_PKGBUILD_Guidelines I am looking at the -git packages but it also applicable to other VCS. Here is the suggested way to create the version local ver="$(git describe --tags)" echo "${ver//-/.}" so 0.7-19-ge4e6e20 will turn into 0.7.19.ge4e6e20 The problem is that the revision number (19 in this case) looks like 3rd component in the version. Now imagine upstream project releases version 0.7.1. The generated version becomes 0.7.1 (and then 0.7.1.1.gfoobar). With the new tag the generated version becomes smaller (0.7.1.1 < 0.7.19). That is the real problem that I had with tup-git package - upstream uses both 2 and 3 component versions. We should recommend a way that works this case. There is a discussion in the comments and the best recommendation is to use following recipe: git describe | sed -E 's/([^-]*-g)/r\1/;s/-/./g' The idea is to find the commit number and start it with "r" (revision). "r" is smaller than a number so it will help in our case. 0.7-19-ge4e6e20 => 0.7.r19.ge4e6e20 Another issue is a repo that has no tags. Here is a recommendation from the wiki page: printf "%s.%s" "$(git rev-list --count HEAD)" "$(git rev-parse --short HEAD)" that will use number of commits (a large number e.g. 3000). The problem arises when the project creates first tag e.g. 0.1. I suggest to fix this problem by using "0" as a tag version (and add prefix 'r' like in the previous item). This makes sure that non-tagged version is always less that a tagged version. So pkgver() will look like: printf "0.r%s.%s" "$(git rev-list --count HEAD)" "$(git rev-parse --short HEAD)" Let me know if you have any objections. If not then I'll update the wiki page.

8 21