- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

Re: License and questions regarding gnome-printing
by Luna Jernberg 19 Jun '25

19 Jun '25

Alright will do Den tors 19 juni 2025 kl 16:50 skrev Ole Aamot <ole(a)aamot.org>: > > Delete gnome-printing from AUR. It is obsolete and not necessary for printing on GNOME Systems. > > On 6/19/25 10:00 AM, Ole Aamot wrote: > > Hello, > > Thank you for your message and for raising these important questions regarding the gnome-printing package recently submitted to the AUR. > > I'll address both of your concerns directly: > > > --- > > 1. License of gnome-printing > > The license for gnome-printing was initially not clearly stated, and I understand this has caused confusion. To clarify: > > The gnome-printing project is an experimental wrapper intended to integrate simplified printing functionality for specific GTK4/GNOME4-based workflows. > > It was developed under the principles of free and open-source software, and the intention is to license it under the Public Domain, in line with most GNOME utilities. > > The license declaration was inadvertently omitted from the initial release, and we will be adding a COPYING file and SPDX license headers in the next version update on https://github.com/aamotsoftware/printing to make this explicit. > > > > --- > > 2. Purpose of gnome-printing > > You are absolutely right that GNOME uses CUPS for its built-in printing system. gnome-printing is not a replacement for CUPS or for GNOME's existing print stack. Instead, its goals are: > > To provide a user-facing frontend (using GTK4/Adwaita) for certain common printing tasks, primarily aimed at developers and tinkerers who want tighter scripting or sandboxed integration (such as within GNOME Builder or Flatpak applications). > > It acts as a thin wrapper around CUPS and the common UNIX lp/lpr utilities, with potential features like: > > previewing print jobs via a minimal UI, > > generating print-ready PDFs, > > selecting specific backends or printers in a streamlined way (especially for headless usage or kiosk setups), > > integration with non-CUPS pipelines (future potential, e.g., IPP-over-USB experiments). > > > > That said, it is indeed redundant for general GNOME desktop users, who already benefit from excellent support via the gnome-control-center and evince/gtk-print stack. As such, gnome-printing is niche and optional, meant more for experimentation and lightweight print job scripting in specific GNOME developer scenarios. > > See https://www.aamot.org/ole/printing.html > --- > > Next Steps > > We will: > > Update the project metadata with the correct license information. > > Clarify the purpose and scope of the package in the AUR description and upstream README to avoid misunderstandings. > > Ensure FabioLolix’s fixes are merged and credited. > > Could you provide me with FabioLolix's fixes? > > --- > > Thanks again for your diligence, and we appreciate the Arch community’s attention to detail and software quality. > > Warm regards, > Ole Kristian Aamot > Aamot Research > ole(a)aamot.software > www.aamot.io > > — cc: Luna (“bittin”), FabioLolix, Muflone > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025, 7:31 AM Chloe <digear466(a)mailgw.com> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> A few days ago, an AUR user bittin ("Luna") submitted the gnome-printing package to AUR and they signed off their emails with "Luna <on behalf >> of Ole>". >> >> Community members have raised several issues with the package. While the build script has been mostly fixed (courtesy of FabioLolix), there are >> still some questions: >> >> 1. What is the license of gnome-printing? We are unable to find the license, and therefore it is uncertain whether this software can be >> redistributed. >> 2. What is the purpose of gnome-printing? Muflone, who is a Package Maintainer (an official Arch Linux staff role), has pointed out that "GNOME >> has builtin printing system using CUPS". Does gnome-printing provide any feature which cannot be satisfied by GNOME's builtin features or other >> existing software? >> >> Regards, >> gnlrdrvo

1 2

Confusion about version for AUR package
by zac 04 Jun '25

04 Jun '25

Hello, I'm hoping to submit an AUR package which is just an OpenRC script for another package. The main package is `blocky` and I'll be calling my package `blocky-openrc` as such. I'm not sure if I should version my package separately, or if it should match the version of Blocky. I'm hesitant to version it by Blocky because it would be annoying to have to update the package version every time a new version of Blocky is released, even though nothing in the OpenRC script has changed. Here is the PKGBUILD. I figured I'd post it in case there's other feedback anyone might have. # Maintainer: zacoons <zac [at] zacoons [dot] com> pkgname=blocky-bin-openrc pkgver=1.0 pkgrel=1 pkgdesc="Fast and lightweight DNS proxy as ad-blocker" arch=("any") url="https://github.com/0xERR0R/blocky" license=("0BSD") depends=( "openrc" ) optdepends=( "blocky: blocky" "blocky-bin: blocky" ) source=( "blocky.initd" ) sha256sums=( "6ad6361614b16ddac6ce9e8d5f8e9b9e8c07e95115f59311e5e38b88ccbb51e3" # blocky.initd ) package() { install -D -v -m755 blocky.initd $pkgdir/etc/init.d/blocky }

5 6

About the edit package at AUR
by Óscar García Amor 22 May '25

22 May '25

Hello folks, I have recently packaged the Microsoft edit[1] in the AUR[2] and it seems to have opened a debate on whether the name is correct or not (in fact the package already has two requests, one for deletion and the other for merging). IMHO the correct package is the one I uploaded as it does not collide with anything (the name `edit` was not being used in any package) and is obviously the closest to upstream (which I have always understood to be the philosophy of Arch Linux). But in any case I would like to know your opinion. Am I wrong, should it be called `ms-edit` or `microsoft-edit`? And if so, is it also logical to rename the executable to `ms-edit` or `msedit`? I read you, best regards. [1]: https://github.com/microsoft/edit [2]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/edit -- Óscar García Amor | ogarcia at moire.org | http://ogarcia.me

4 9

tlauncher no longer on the AUR
by Marcel 19 May '25

19 May '25

I see that tlauncher got removed. Is it because it was orphaned/abandoned or for its spyware side?

2 1

PKGBUILD review python application wtfis
by aur＠nullvoid.me 19 May '25

19 May '25

Hi, Could someone review https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/wtfis This is my first time packaging a python tool from PyPI My understanding since it's not a library python-wtfis would be an incorrect naming convention. I used a tool to generate the first PKGBUILD then added dependencies. I assume lots of other things are missing to make this meet proper AUR standards. Thanks in advance,

3 2

Temporarily suspend matthewq337 user
by Michał 02 May '25

02 May '25

Hello, I've seen this user squats many packages dropped which are either dropped to AUR or abandoned, and then adds other people who are actually interested in said packages to co-maintainers. I've had this happen to me with 3 packages, which are also mentioned in examples list below. In the past few months I have seen this user push various nonsense commits to many packages. Some examples are: ruby-rails (and dependencies) where only pkgver was bumped, without testing any build. This resulted in build failures for simple reasons such as missing files: https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/commit/?h=ruby-actionview&id=a98abc6… https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-actionview#comment-1019144 pyload-ng, pushing changes without pulling first and other nonsense "updated" commits without testing also visible in git log https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/commit/?h=pyload-ng&id=c91cc2cb90daa… librewolf-hg, package "fixed" which resulted in pkgbuild being unusable https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/librewolf-hg#comment-981229 python-dukpy, changing license file name from right to wrong which prevented install: https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/commit/?h=python-dukpy&id=2ddc02e9fa… https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/commit/?h=python-dukpy&id=9d7aab0205… python-glfw, bumping pkgver, but this did not actually result in new version being built: https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=python-glfw#n13 These examples are not from malice or anything, but from not testing changes and incompetence. "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone", but I think that such over such long period of time (~6 months at least) mistakes in packaging without seemingly any improvement show that matthewq337 doesn't care about state of packages. I am therefore calling for moderator action, to prevent this from happening so that Matthew can reflect. Kind regards, micwoj92

5 6

Package Maintainer Application: George Hu
by Integral 24 Apr '25

24 Apr '25

Hello everyone, My name is George, or Integral/Integral-Tech on AUR and other places. I am writing this email to apply as an Arch Linux package maintainer as I have been sponsored by Felix Yan and Robin Candau. I started my Linux journey with Ubuntu when I was in high school. In my freshman year, I caught myself drawn to GNU/Linux, specifically Manjaro and Arch Linux. After referring to relevant documents and tutorials, I replaced Windows with Manjaro thoroughly. Although I initially felt out of my comfort zone, I grew more comfortable as I navigated this new platform. Eventually, I switched to Arch Linux in 2022. For a Linux neophyte, installing Arch Linux proved challenging, therefore it took me a couple of days to accomplish with assistance from Arch Wiki and other tutorials. My exploration of the system further led me to AUR, a highlight of Arch Linux that deeply intrigued me. Under the guidance of Arch Wiki and enthusiastic Arch Linux users, I looked up how to write PKGBUILDs and publish them on the AUR. During this time, archlinuxcn, an unofficial binary package repository maintained by the Chinese Arch Linux community, piqued my curiosity. Motivated by an overwhelming desire to become an archlinuxcn maintainer, I submitted my application accordingly. As of now, my primary duties in the archlinuxcn community include creating/maintaining Arch Linux packages and translating Arch Wiki articles: - https://github.com/archlinuxcn/repo/commits/master/?author=Integral-Tech Here are some AUR packages I maintain: - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qefientrymanager - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qefientrymanager-git - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/linux-apfs-rw-dkms - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/caligula-git - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/clapgrep - https://aur.archlinux.org/tunet-rust - https://aur.archlinux.org/tunet-rust-git Furthermore, I have submitted several merge requests on Arch Linux GitLab, including but not limited to protonmail-bridge, linux and pacman. Here are some of my merge requests on Arch Linux GitLab: - https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/linux/-/ merge_requests/5 - https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/dart/-/ merge_requests/10 - https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/crystal/-/ merge_requests/2 - https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/protonmail-bridge… merge_requests/1 - https://gitlab.archlinux.org/pacman/pacman/-/merge_requests/239 Apart from Arch Linux, I contribute to a wide spectrum of free and open- source projects in my free time, including but not limited to KDE, bcachefs-tools and yazi (a fast terminal file manager written in Rust). You can refer to my contributions on the following links: - GitHub (http://github.com/Integral-Tech) - KDE Invent (http://invent.kde.org/integral) - linux-bcachefs mailing list (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bcachefs) As a dedicated free software supporter, I joined FSF as a student associate member in Feb 2023. Moreover, I am sponsoring various FOSS developers and nonprofit organizations on a regular basis: - https://github.com/Integral-Tech?tab=sponsoring If my application is approved, I would like to add these packages into [extra]: - clapgrep - cpr - ctre - dissent - flyctl Additionally, I am also willing to co-maintain the following packages: - yazi - bcachefs-tools Thanks for reading my application! Sincerely, George Hu (Integral)

4 8

Replacing bin package by source package
by Jan Kohnert 21 Apr '25

21 Apr '25

Hi, I recently adopted the helmify-bin package and pushed the new version to aur. But since it is a bin package, I decided to prepare a PKGBUILD the uses build-from- source along the go packageing guidelines. I'm indenting to push this new ebuild and orphan the bin-package once this is done. Before pushing it: I'm wondering whether i sould set "replaces=("helmify-bin")" or "conflicts=("helmify-bin")" in the new PKGBUILD when I'm trying to say "dear users, blease use this new package instead of the bin package". Any thoughts? Thanks in advance! -- MfG Jan

2 1

Could someone please fix DL link oki-c321-c331-c531
by JPT 04 Apr '25

04 Apr '25

Hi, could someone please fix https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/oki-c321-c331-c531 the download link of the binary blob changed from http://www.oki.com/uk/printing/download/C531_C331_C321_Linux_110_31034.zip to https://www.oki.com/printing/download/C531_C331_C321_Linux_110_31034.zip so, just the "UK" removed. thank you very much JPT ps. the maintainer seems active (on other packages) but did not react to my comment two weeks ago.

2 1

Removal of farseerfc as Package Maintainer due to inactivity
by gromit 27 Mar '25

27 Mar '25

Hi all, I'd like to start a ["Special Removal of an Inactive Package Maintainer"][0] for farseerfc based on prolonged inactivity. farseerfc has not executed any of the expected packaging or AUR maintenance duties for more than a year now. When I recently contacted all people who were inactive for a longer period of time I heard back from him saying that [he wanted to get back to things][1] and but would need a few weeks. This conversation has now happened 5 months ago and nothing has changed since. - I couldn't find any packaging activity for him in the state repo since Apr 29 08:01:12 2023 - He did not do any AUR Moderation since 2022 Given these circumstances I'm requesting Jiachen to be removed as a Package Maintainer. If at some later point he has the time / resources to help out again he is of course welcome to join the project again! The discussion period for this proposal will last for three days, after which there will be a voting period of five days as outlined in the bylaws. Cheers, gromit [0]: https://package-maintainer-bylaws.aur.archlinux.org/#_special_removal_of_an… [1]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/ttf-opensans/-/is…

2 2