On 26.3.2012 19:06, rafael ff1 wrote:
2012/3/26 Det<nimetonmaili@gmail.com>:
I guess this is a good summary of all the talk in virtualbox-sun's comment section[1].
The reality here is that virtualbox-bin[2] has evolved into something _at least_ as good as virtualbox-sun. While it's true that -sun is the original one it's also the one with the incorrect naming, a bit slower updates (by a day or so) and less votes (229 vs -bin's 3430). Because we can't justify keeping duplicated work around just to make everybody happy, one of them has to go.
Even if -sun was to stay here the "better" stuff in -bin would have to be implemented there first before the removal and the renaming. When put together with the comment/vote merge it's starting to sound a bit pointless (taken how we can just remove that one).
I know what I'd do but it's not my decision: it's yours.
[1] virtualbox-sun = https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31996 [2] virtualbox-bin = https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=51727
Det It is interesting how both provide the same version of the same softwaer, but have totally different depedency listed. For example, "kernel26-headers" for virtualbox-sun. Yeah. -sun is a bit outdated there too.