[aur-general] Misconceptions about the AUR?

On Fri 02 Mar 2012 00:49 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:

Am Fri, 02 Mar 2012 09:21:33 +1000 schrieb Allan McRae :

...

You do realize who first came up with the workaround for adding split packages to the AUR... Because from memory it was figured out in the TU IRC channel.

I don't know, because I'm not in the IRC channels. But if I recall correctly this workaround was also discussed in the forums and/or the mailing lists. This was at a time when it was still discussed if AUR shall support split packages or not.

The package splittest which was meant to test this workaround and to give a sample PKGBUILD was uploaded to AUR by Harvie, a normal user. And if I recall correctly it was him who first came up with it. But I can be wrong.

The problem is if you add a subpackage of a split package into a depends array as György did it just can't be installed, because AUR don't know anything about those subpackages, because it doesn't support split packages. And thus the AUR wrappers can't find them. So it's not possible to install those packages.

First of all I'll deplore you for hijacking György's TU Application thread to rant about your own qualms. You should be ashamed. You should apologise. You are wrong. Secondly. If a PKGBUILD can be built with makepkg then it IS a valid PKGBUILD. No matter what you say. If an AUR helper cannot process it, then there is a problem with the AUR helper, not the AUR and not the PKGBUILD. Third. The AUR is not meant to help you build source packages. It hosts them, and parses the tarballs only for convenience. You are supposed to install it by your own means. If your means are buggy, that's your problem. Finally, yes, there are problems with Arch source packages but you're missing the solution by lightyears. These things have been discussed on the list, the forums, and the bugtracker. You would be keen to do a little research and perhaps propose solutions (patches?) rather than wasting precious oxygen. Cheers.