On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:03:29PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
Hi,
Lukas Fleischer wrote:
Why don't we simply drop xorriso and xorriso-tcltk from the AUR
I suspect that the AUR package was requested by some user of GRUB. If "xorriso" gets removed, then it might be requested again, and some friendly unaware person might re-introduce it.
By the same argument, you could say that we should keep completely broken and wrong packages on the AUR, because there is a chance someone will create the same broken package in the future again. The best thing we can do is drop this stuff and do our best to prevent it from happening again. There are even tools for automated detection of stuff that is duplicated in the AUR (see aurdupes [1]), so I do not think it is a big issue.
and add Tcl/Tk/BWidget optdepends to libisoburn ? Maybe also add both xorriso and xorriso-tcltk as provides.
Maybe the words "optdepends" and "provides" invalidate my qualms. Dunno ... You are the experts. Tell me if you expect me to do something particular.
The provides directive makes sure that people can put something like depends=('xorriso') in their PKGBUILDs and it will automatically use libisoburn instead -- basically what you are trying to imitate with those empty meta packages. optdepends can be used for something like: optdepends=('tcl: for xorriso-tcltk') I think the combination of these is what we want, isn't it? You can check the PKGBUILD(5) man page for details. There is an online version at [2].
Background:
xorriso-tcltk is a wish script. It installs fine without wish, and bash tells properly what's missing when started: -bash: /usr/bin/xorriso-tcltk: wish: bad interpreter: No such file or directory
The dependency on Bwidget is optional and self-adjusting.
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/aurdupes/ [2] https://www.archlinux.org/pacman/PKGBUILD.5.html