- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Non-Free font packages
by George Brooke 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

Hi, Today I noticed the following packages on the AUR, osx-lion-fonts [1] and win7-fonts [2]. Both of these packages download the fonts from an FTP server which appears to be operated by the maintainer, not from any kind of official source and although they both specify "Custom" as the license neither of them install a license file (or show any indication that the maintainer has permission to redistribute the files). To me, this gives the appearance that the archives linked to are probably copyright infringing. As I understand it, PKGBUILDs which link to infringing sources are generally frowned upon which is why others for Win7 fonts (for example) require the user to manually acquire and copy the font files. Could a TU and/or the maintainer (who is CCed in) investigate and clarify the situation. Thanks GeorgeB [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=61979 [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=61978

2 1

[aur-general] Package removal: notification-daemon-engine-nodoka-git
by Spyros Stathopoulos 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

Hello! I maintain this package [1] but it has not been updated upstream for about 3 years and does not longer build. Could someone please remove it? Thanks! Spyros [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=36626

2 1

[aur-general] Removal: fcitx-keyboard and fcitx-keyboard-git
by Justin Wong 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

fcitx-keyboard has been merged into fcitx's main package since fcitx 4.2.4. https://www.csslayer.info/wordpress/fcitx-dev/fcitx-4-2-4/ -- Open Source,Open Mind Blog: http://bigeagle.me/ E-mail: bigeagle(a)xdlinux.info

3 2

[aur-general] Deletion request: xournal-image-patched
by Egon Geerardyn 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

I think xournal-image-patched [1] can be deleted as it is outdated and its main reason for existence was including images, which has been included in the latest version in community [2] (as mentioned by the former maintainer in the comments on AUR [1]). [1] AUR xournal-image-patched: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38375&detail=1 [2] xournal in community: http://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=&q=xournal&maintainer=&last_update=… Thanks! Egon Geerardyn

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

=== 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 * 18 packages missing signoffs * 9 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) == * systemd-arch-units-20120704-2 (any) 0/2 signoffs * cdfs-2.6.27-26 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * ndiswrapper-1.57-18 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * open-vm-tools-modules-2012.05.21-6 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.031.00-9 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-12 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * slmodem-2.9.11-67 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20120422-7 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.1.18-6 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * cdfs-2.6.27-26 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * ndiswrapper-1.57-18 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * open-vm-tools-modules-2012.05.21-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.031.00-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-12 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20120422-7 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.1.18-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (2 total) == * tp_smapi-0.41-5 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (9 total) == * virtualbox-modules-4.1.18-6 (x86_64), since 2012-07-30 * virtualbox-modules-4.1.18-6 (i686), since 2012-07-30 * slmodem-2.9.11-67 (i686), since 2012-07-30 * open-vm-tools-modules-2012.05.21-6 (x86_64), since 2012-07-30 * open-vm-tools-modules-2012.05.21-6 (i686), since 2012-07-30 * cdfs-2.6.27-26 (i686), since 2012-07-30 * cdfs-2.6.27-26 (x86_64), since 2012-07-30 * ndiswrapper-1.57-18 (i686), since 2012-07-31 * ndiswrapper-1.57-18 (x86_64), since 2012-07-31 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. tomegun - 2 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Microchip Compilers Cleanup
by BxS 14 Aug '12

14 Aug '12

Hi TUs, I think is time for a cleanup in microchip compilers that I maintain, lets start: a) Merge hitech-picc_bin[1] and hitech-picc-18_bin[2] to microchip-mplabxc8-bin[3]. Microchip bought [1] and [2] but now they are now legacy compilers, Microchip decide to make [1]+[2]=[3], microchip-mplabxc8-bin[3] are just the new versions of [1] and [2] packaged together with some small additions. The code for [1]&[2] should just compile in [3], if not the changes needed are very minimal, like in a normal new compiler version. [1]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=52776 [2]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=52777 [3]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=57911 b) Merge microchip-mplabc32_bin[4] to microchip-mplabxc32-bin[5]. [4] are now a legacy compiler, Microchip decide to make [4]->[5], microchip-mplabxc32-bin[5] are just the new versions of [4], with some additions like C++ support. The code for [4] should just compile in [5], if not the changes needed are minimal, like in a new version of a compiler. Also [4] for Linux don't appear any more in any Microchip webpage. [4]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=52726 [5]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=57912 c) Delete hitech-dspicc-bin[6]. [6] are a legacy compiler for a long time, Microchip in [6] page says: "Microchip highly recommends the MPLAB C Compiler for PIC24 and dsPIC (SW006012) for new designs." Note that the recommended (SW006012) are this days already also a legacy compiler, the (SW006012) have been replaced by microchip-mplabxc16-bin[7], so you can have an idea. Also [6] have 0 votes. [6]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=54315 [7]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=59174 d) Delete hitech-picc32-bin[8]. [8] are a legacy compiler for a long time, Microchip in [8] page says: "Microchip highly recommends the MPLAB C Compiler for PIC32 (SW006015) for new designs." Note that the recommended (SW006015)=microchip-mplabc32_bin[4] are this days already also a legacy compiler, as you can see in my b) merge request, so you can have an idea. [8]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=54315 Sorry for all the requests, thanks for everything. Best Regards, BxS

2 2

[aur-general] Dropping wvstreams/wvdial from [community]
by Florian Pritz 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

wvstreams stopped building with gcc 4.7, upstream is dead for ~2 years now and gentoo's patches don't seem to fix stack magic checking properly. Current trunk (not pushed to the repos) gets me a different error than the one reported[1], but it still fails after pppd has been started: > wvdial: utils/wvtask.cc:304: static int WvTaskMan::yield(int): Assertion `*current_task->stack_magic == 0x123678' failed. Unless someone adopts wvstreams and wvdial I'll drop them to AUR next week. [1]: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/31096 -- Florian Pritz

2 2

[aur-general] Mozc
by Tony Olagbaiye 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

Hi all! Can I request that a TU add Mozc to the community repo? It has 32 votes, which is plenty above the guideline (25), and it takes quite a while to build. It is actively developed, by Google employees themselves, but is under the BSD License. It would be much appreciated if someone would! -- Tony

3 2

[aur-general] ongoing TU inactivity for Chris Brannon
by Chris Brannon 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

I'm still inactive, and it looks like I will remain so until mid-September. Things should have settled down for me by then. Thanks for all the kind words from people in the community. -- Chris

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

=== 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 * 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.) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (16 total) == * systemd-arch-units-20120704-2 (any) 0/2 signoffs * cdfs-2.6.27-26 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * ndiswrapper-1.57-18 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * open-vm-tools-modules-2012.05.21-6 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.031.00-9 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-12 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * slmodem-2.9.11-67 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20120422-7 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.1.18-6 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * cdfs-2.6.27-26 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * ndiswrapper-1.57-18 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * open-vm-tools-modules-2012.05.21-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.031.00-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-12 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20120422-7 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.1.18-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (2 total) == * tp_smapi-0.41-5 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. andyrtr - 1 signoffs 2. dan - 1 signoffs

1 0