On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 09:36:10PM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
On 08/04/12 18:15, Karol Błażewicz wrote:
On Sun, 08 Apr 2012 18:13:24 +0200, oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de> wrote:
Also it confuses me that shotwell is on http://www.archlinux.org as well as http://aur.archlinux.org
You can put any package in the AUR as long as it doesn't use the exact same name as some package from the official repos. shotwell v. shotwell-git is fine.
There are tons of such packages. There's usually just one version of a package in the official repos but the AUR can have multiple ones: -git, -light, -no-foo etc.
Sergej is inactive atm, i will look into updating it [...]
Yes, would be fine to have a newer shotwell. When I tried to build shotwell from the AUR package http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48503 it tried to load "libgexiv2-git". But that package does not exist. There only is the package "libgexiv2-git 20110430-1". So either libgexiv2-git 20110430-1 must be used in the shotwell package, or maybe the "libgexiv2-git 20110430-1" will not work togehter with that shotwell version. Or maybe only "libgexiv2" should be given as dependency, which is avaialable via pacman. But I don't know if that version of "libgexiv2" might give problems. Any ideas on this? Or would you like to update the shotwell stuff soon? This would be fine. Ciao, Oliver