Courtesy should be important. Contact the maintainer directly and let them know what is wrong. OR, use the bug reporting system. You will be thanked for your efforts, and you will feel better about being courteous. Plus you will have educated someone instead of potentially making them angry by ignoring them when trying to directly change things. No one wants to be ignored, so please consider taking the time to send a note to the "maintainer". Very best regards; Bob Finch
Hi everybody,
I am new to this list, so excuse me if I ask stupid questions. I own a 64 bits machine, and feel that could help more on this 64 bits subject.
Several times, I had to install 64 bits packages which were not 64bits ready. I had to change the PKGBUILD to make it work (and sometimes more). It was fine for me, however the package was not updated for others. I have not found any way to make it available for others, except than to add a note to the package in AUR.
But it is not very efficient. Package maintainer may not read it or may not be available, etc...
As currently I am not TU, I wonder if there is any other way to further help on this. Your proposal Allan seems good to fit this needs, provided that non TU are allowed to update it. But still, you would have to update manually the PKGBUILD for the archictecture supported. How to do this when you are not the maintainer ?
my64
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [aur-general] Keeping community64 up to date From: Allan McRae <allan.mcrae@qimr.edu.au> To: Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR) <aur-general@archlinux.org> Date: ven 21 mar 2008 12:37:20 CET
Hi,
I have come to realize that the current way of keeping community64 in sync could use some improving. I realized this when looking at the pkg_diff web page [1] thinking I would build some packages. After being distracted by the internet for a few minutes... I reloaded the page and noticed that some of the packages had been uploaded. Now had I actually built those packages, it would have been a waste of time. Also, I'm never sure how much time to wait and see whether the TU who uploaded the i686 package is going to upload the x86_64 package.
How can this be improved? The best I can come up with is making a wiki page with a list of x86_64 build requests. TU's who upload a i686 package and are not going to build the x86_64 package themselves would need to add the package to the page. Think of it as punishment for not building it yourself. :) When someone else goes to build the package they either remove it from the list or tag that it is being built.
That probably isn't the best idea, but I feel that the current system is a bit flawed. Any other suggestions/comments?
Allan
Liviu Librescu - În veci pomenirea lui. (May his memory be eternal.)