[aur-general] Removal package request

Lukáš Jirkovský

10 Mar 2010 10 Mar '10

7:41 a.m.

This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB). http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338

Show replies by date

Daniel Isenmann

10 Mar 10 Mar

7:46 a.m.

Am 10.03.2010 08:41, schrieb Lukáš Jirkovský:

...

This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338

Done. Totally useless package.

Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)

8:33 a.m.

On 03/10/10 at 08:46am, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...

Am 10.03.2010 08:41, schrieb Lukáš Jirkovský:

...
This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338

Done. Totally useless package. Now i'm really curious... what was it? --

Anders Bergh

9:23 a.m.

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 09:33, Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227) wrote:

...

On 03/10/10 at 08:46am, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
Am 10.03.2010 08:41, schrieb Lukáš Jirkovský:

...
This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338

Done. Totally useless package. Now i'm really curious... what was it? --

It would be nice if packages weren't just deleted, but moved somewhere else for inspection or just disabled somehow... -- Anders Bergh

Thorsten Töpper

9:54 a.m.

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:23:58 +0100 Anders Bergh wrote:

...

It would be nice if packages weren't just deleted, but moved somewhere else for inspection or just disabled somehow...

The tarball is still available at http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/testtesttest/testtesttest.tar.gz -- Jabber: atsutane@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4

Ionut Biru

10:07 a.m.

On 03/10/2010 11:54 AM, Thorsten Töpper wrote:

...

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:23:58 +0100 Anders Bergh wrote:

...
It would be nice if packages weren't just deleted, but moved somewhere else for inspection or just disabled somehow...

The tarball is still available at http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/testtesttest/testtesttest.tar.gz

i'll say to suspend his account. -- Ionut

Ray Rashif

10:11 a.m.

On 10/03/2010, Ionut Biru wrote:

...

On 03/10/2010 11:54 AM, Thorsten Töpper wrote:

...
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:23:58 +0100 Anders Bergh wrote:

...
It would be nice if packages weren't just deleted, but moved somewhere else for inspection or just disabled somehow...

The tarball is still available at http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/testtesttest/testtesttest.tar.gz

i'll say to suspend his account.

He/she might've had a legitimate reason and no ill intent, but that can only be verified by e-mailing that person and then receiving a reply. -- GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD

Allan McRae

10:31 a.m.

On 10/03/10 20:11, Ray Rashif wrote:

...

On 10/03/2010, Ionut Biru wrote:

...
On 03/10/2010 11:54 AM, Thorsten Töpper wrote:

...
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:23:58 +0100 Anders Bergh wrote:

...
It would be nice if packages weren't just deleted, but moved somewhere else for inspection or just disabled somehow...

The tarball is still available at http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/testtesttest/testtesttest.tar.gz

i'll say to suspend his account.

He/she might've had a legitimate reason and no ill intent, but that can only be verified by e-mailing that person and then receiving a reply.

Really... I can not think of one. I also think the account should be suspended. Allan

Daenyth Blank

4:37 p.m.

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 05:31, Allan McRae wrote:

...

Really... I can not think of one. I also think the account should be suspended.

Allan

+1. Even if there weren't malicious intentions, it still shows a remarkable lack of common sense.

Anders Bergh

21 Mar 21 Mar

3:47 a.m.

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:54, Thorsten Töpper wrote:

...

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:23:58 +0100 Anders Bergh wrote:

...
It would be nice if packages weren't just deleted, but moved somewhere else for inspection or just disabled somehow...

The tarball is still available at http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/testtesttest/testtesttest.tar.gz

-- Jabber: atsutane@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4

Late reply, but that doesn't really help since all what was posted was the ID of the package. Now that it has been deleted, I have no way of telling which package that was. I assume it wasn't "testtesttest". -- Anders Bergh

Lukáš Jirkovský

7:49 a.m.

...

Late reply, but that doesn't really help since all what was posted was the ID of the package. Now that it has been deleted, I have no way of telling which package that was. I assume it wasn't "testtesttest".

It was "testtesttest". Lukas

Daniel Isenmann

10 Mar 10 Mar

9:37 a.m.

-------- Original-Nachricht --------

...

Datum: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:33:41 -0600 Von: "Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)" An: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" Betreff: Re: [aur-general] Removal package request

...

On 03/10/10 at 08:46am, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
Am 10.03.2010 08:41, schrieb Lukáš Jirkovský:

...
This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338

Done. Totally useless package. Now i'm really curious... what was it? --

It was a package with an 1GB included "patch" file. But the so called "patch" wasn't in text form, it was something in binary form. Maybe we were misused as file hoster or somebody just tested something. -- Sicherer, schneller und einfacher. Die aktuellen Internet-Browser - jetzt kostenlos herunterladen! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/atbrowser

Lukáš Jirkovský

9:45 a.m.

On 10 March 2010 10:37, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...

-------- Original-Nachricht --------

...
Datum: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:33:41 -0600 Von: "Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)" An: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" Betreff: Re: [aur-general] Removal package request

...
On 03/10/10 at 08:46am, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
Am 10.03.2010 08:41, schrieb Lukáš Jirkovský:

...
This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338

Done. Totally useless package. Now i'm really curious... what was it? --

It was a package with an 1GB included "patch" file. But the so called "patch" wasn't in text form, it was something in binary form. Maybe we were misused as file hoster or somebody just tested something. -- Sicherer, schneller und einfacher. Die aktuellen Internet-Browser - jetzt kostenlos herunterladen! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/atbrowser

When it first appeared (it was yesterday) it was empty PKGBUILD with description "I'm not trollin" and foo.patch which had 256MB. The patch seemed to be an empty file (like dd if=/dev/zero of=file). I thought the uploader will ask for deletion soon but I didn't see anyone asking for deletion of the package so I checked it on the AUR. It was there but the patch had 1GB! So I asked for deletion myself. Lukas

Loui Chang

3:50 p.m.

On Wed 10 Mar 2010 10:45 +0100, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:

...

On 10 March 2010 10:37, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
-------- Original-Nachricht --------

...
Datum: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:33:41 -0600 Von: "Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)" An: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" Betreff: Re: [aur-general] Removal package request

...
On 03/10/10 at 08:46am, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

...
Am 10.03.2010 08:41, schrieb Lukáš Jirkovský:

...
This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338

Done. Totally useless package. Now i'm really curious... what was it? --

It was a package with an 1GB included "patch" file. But the so called "patch" wasn't in text form, it was something in binary form. Maybe we were misused as file hoster or somebody just tested something. -- Sicherer, schneller und einfacher. Die aktuellen Internet-Browser - jetzt kostenlos herunterladen! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/atbrowser

When it first appeared (it was yesterday) it was empty PKGBUILD with description "I'm not trollin" and foo.patch which had 256MB. The patch seemed to be an empty file (like dd if=/dev/zero of=file). I thought the uploader will ask for deletion soon but I didn't see anyone asking for deletion of the package so I checked it on the AUR. It was there but the patch had 1GB! So I asked for deletion myself.

I could have sworn we had a file size cap on there. I'll have to look into that. Thanks for the notice.

Gereon Schomber

4:26 p.m.

...

...
When it first appeared (it was yesterday) it was empty PKGBUILD with description "I'm not trollin" and foo.patch which had 256MB. The patch seemed to be an empty file (like dd if=/dev/zero of=file). I thought the uploader will ask for deletion soon but I didn't see anyone asking for deletion of the package so I checked it on the AUR. It was there but the patch had 1GB! So I asked for deletion myself.

I could have sworn we had a file size cap on there. I'll have to look into that. Thanks for the notice.

Well, if it was from /dev/zero, it compresses rather well and won't be affected by a file size limit.

Loui Chang

6:48 p.m.

On Wed 10 Mar 2010 17:26 +0100, Gereon Schomber wrote:

...

...
...
When it first appeared (it was yesterday) it was empty PKGBUILD with description "I'm not trollin" and foo.patch which had 256MB. The patch seemed to be an empty file (like dd if=/dev/zero of=file). I thought the uploader will ask for deletion soon but I didn't see anyone asking for deletion of the package so I checked it on the AUR. It was there but the patch had 1GB! So I asked for deletion myself.

I could have sworn we had a file size cap on there. I'll have to look into that. Thanks for the notice.

Well, if it was from /dev/zero, it compresses rather well and won't be affected by a file size limit.

Hmm. Any ideas on how we could avert this kind of issue?

Evangelos Foutras

6:47 p.m.

On 10/03/2010 08:48 μμ, Loui Chang wrote:

...

On Wed 10 Mar 2010 17:26 +0100, Gereon Schomber wrote:

...
...
...
When it first appeared (it was yesterday) it was empty PKGBUILD with description "I'm not trollin" and foo.patch which had 256MB. The patch seemed to be an empty file (like dd if=/dev/zero of=file). I thought the uploader will ask for deletion soon but I didn't see anyone asking for deletion of the package so I checked it on the AUR. It was there but the patch had 1GB! So I asked for deletion myself.

I could have sworn we had a file size cap on there. I'll have to look into that. Thanks for the notice.

Well, if it was from /dev/zero, it compresses rather well and won't be affected by a file size limit.

Hmm. Any ideas on how we could avert this kind of issue?

Something like http://serverfault.com/questions/9930/get-extracted-size-from-tgz-before-ext... maybe?

Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)

7:47 a.m.

On 03/10/10 at 08:41am, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:

...

This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338 It also doesn't exist... or did someone beat me to it? --

Daniel Isenmann

8:07 a.m.

Am 10.03.2010 08:47, schrieb Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227):

...

On 03/10/10 at 08:41am, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:

...
This following package does nothing. Or actually it does – it takes a lot of space (1GB).

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35338 It also doesn't exist... or did someone beat me to it?

I deleted it just after reading the mail. I have answered already, so you should get the mail soon... ;)

5149

Age (days ago)

5160

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

18 comments

12 participants

participants (12)

Allan McRae
Anders Bergh
Daenyth Blank
Daniel Isenmann
Daniel J Griffiths (Ghost1227)
Evangelos Foutras
Gereon Schomber
Ionut Biru
Loui Chang
Lukáš Jirkovský
Ray Rashif
Thorsten Töpper