-----Original Message-----

Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 21:02:06 +0100 Subject: Re: [aur-general] Packages From: "Imanol Celaya" To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)"

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Jens Maucher  wrote:  Hello  is flashplugin-mozilla (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18695 [2])  the same as flashplugin from [extra]?

 Regards  --  Jens 'defcon' Maucher

to me it seems so, but it's a quite strange PKGBUILD

Links: ------ [1] mailto:jensmaucher@online.de [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18695

Hello, at first sight I would say it is the same. But the package has many votes and so I asked on the comment page if there are nonobvious benefits. In [extra] there is only a package for i686, in [testing] there are packages for both architectures, but with different version numbers. That is strange to me. Regards Stefan

By the way... OT: It's only with me, or we are having problems to update our packages? One of my packages was with a broken link so I changed it but I can't upload it. It doesn't works. o.O Am I crazy?? I did it with two different machines with two different links. o.O Best Regards --- - °v° Marcelo Cavalcante Rocha / Kalib - /(_)\ Usuário Linux #407564 / Usuário Asterisk #1148 - ^ ^ GNU-Linux - Livre, Poderoso e Seguro - TUX-CE Member - www.tux-ce.org - Archlinux-br Developer Team - http://archlinux-br.org - http://blog.marcelocavalcante.net On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:55 PM, stefan-husmann@t-online.de wrote:

...

In [extra] there is only a package for i686, in [testing] there are packages for both architectures, but with different version numbers. That is strange to me.

We are dealing with this now. Adobe has some restrictive redistribution rules.... the versions in testing should move to extra soon-ish