Hello,

You best bet is to make a comment to the maintainer in AURweb letting them know of which commit hash contains the fix for what's broken and if they are willing to back-port it.

A little addition to this. The MangoHUD package seems to be very well maintained, so I am sure that the maintainers would be willing to backport the patch in the later version, provided that it is not complicated to do. If the patch relies on too many other changes since the last release, then it is hard to cleanly patch the source code before compiling, and you will need to wait until the next release. First of all you just got to ask like Artafinde has already explained, but don't get your hopes up as even if they are willing to help it might not be possible, and you would need to wait until the next release, or use the -git package (be aware that the -git packages are renown for being unstable, use at your own risk). As an additional sidenode, if the issue you want to report is that the package is broken because it can't be built, the maintainer has already highlighted that it is due to gcc update, and they are awaiting upstream to patch the issue. That was posted 3 days ago so I assume it is still valid right now as I do not see any recent commits to the AUR for this package. (not since 2023-04-18) If all comes to worse, -git might still be somewhat functional until the next release, so you do have options.

I don't want to blame anyone, but is it normal that non -git packages may be broken? (maybe it is, I genuinely don't know) Currently, the mangohud package is broken even though upstream has fixed the bug. The mangohud-git package is also fine.

I want to also add something to this. A lot of the time -git packages and non-git packages are maintained by different maintainers, this does mean that one maintainer could have made an error (we are human, we all make mistakes) which could have broken a package, hopefully they catch this, but not every maintainer tests the changes before pushing to the AUR. Please bear in mind, the AUR is a dumping ground of many different quality of packages, some of them are high quality, some of them low quality. Official packages go through a lot more testing before you get to use them, the TUs read the patch notes, check the dependencies, check for conflicts, ensure that the software builds in a clean environment, and then a package is often added to community-testing, here the Arch Testing Team (Someone like me :P) comes along and will pull the package down and then try to find any issues with it. If it all works then we sign it off through the aurweb. Once two (or more) signatures are received a TU can move the package into community. As you can see a lot of effort goes into the process until you get your update to your package, allowing you to trust when you execute pacman -Syu that _hopefully_ your system doesn't break. Now with the AUR, you have to build it yourself, and you have to hope that the maintainer has put the love and care into the package and hasn't just tried to bump the version and not bothered to check if it actually builds or not. TL;DR AUR can be really useful, but do expect breakages, a lot of them, it doesn't matter if it is -git, or -bin or a normal source package, they are all affected. Get used to reporting issues you find via aurweb, and if you want to help out, write some patches and send them to the maintainer, or become a maintainer (or co-maintainer) of a package, aur-general is more than happy to review your PKGBUILD to ensure it follows conventions and also works as expected, as long as you got the time and want to help out, nothing is stopping you :) I have realised I have wrote a very long email, for a very small problem, but I hope me elaborating on all the points may aid you, and lets hope artafinde does not need to correct me anywhere :) Have a good night, -- Polarian GPG signature: 0770E5312238C760 Website: https://polarian.dev JID/XMPP: polarian@polarian.dev