What is the business behind many sandboxing package being deleted?
Hi community, I’m an ordinary user who relies on the sandboxing packages from the AUR. To my surprise, a large number of these packages have been removed and the maintainer now points us to a separate PKGBUILD repository. According to the AUR submission guidelines , the AUR (and official repos) are meant for “packages which install general software and software‑related content, including … configuration file(s).” Sandbox packages are precisely configuration files that provide unique, valuable features for many users. When I asked the maintainer on Matrix for an explanation, she replied simply: “Are you having the false sensation of AUR being free? I had that mistake before.” The wholesale deletion of these packages undermines the sandboxing community’s efforts and leaves countless users without essential tools. I request a clear, reasoned justification for this action and a reconsideration of the policy’s application to sandbox packages. Thank you. concierge9156
Hello concierge9156, Would you mind sharing the packages in question that have been removed from the AUR? Additionally, did the maintainer of these packages offer any reason as to why the packages were removed? Best, Stephanos Pavlou On Tuesday, September 16th, 2025 at 10:00 PM, concierge9156 <concierge9156@icloud.com> wrote:
Hi community,
I’m an ordinary user who relies on the sandboxing packages from the AUR. To my surprise, a large number of these packages have been removed and the maintainer now points us to a separate PKGBUILD repository.
According to the AUR submission guidelines, the AUR (and official repos) are meant for “packages which install general software and software‑related content, including … configuration file(s).” Sandbox packages are precisely configuration files that provide unique, valuable features for many users.
When I asked the maintainer on Matrix for an explanation, she replied simply:
“Are you having the false sensation of AUR being free? I had that mistake before.”
The wholesale deletion of these packages undermines the sandboxing community’s efforts and leaves countless users without essential tools. I request a clear, reasoned justification for this action and a reconsideration of the policy’s application to sandbox packages.
Thank you.
concierge9156
Hi list, I didn't read those mails atm because it went to the Junk box. Typical iCloud filtering. Though I still hold my original statement. AUR or even Arch is not the place for sandbox users IMO. Use Fedora or other distros with Flatpak if you care about security and privacy, or use my portable-arch repository: https://github.com/Kraftland/portable-arch. Portable also supports most distros following FHS, not just Arch. EDIT: Huh the original sender is gone. -- Sincerely, Kimiblock
On 9/23/25 4:24 AM, Kimiblock Moe wrote:
Hi list,
Hi,
I didn't read those mails atm because it went to the Junk box. Typical iCloud filtering. Though I still hold my original statement.
AUR or even Arch is not the place for sandbox users IMO. Use Fedora or other distros with Flatpak if you care about security and privacy,
I'm not sure where this is coming from? Arch has Flatpak [1][2] and can definitely be made security and privacy oriented [3], including application sandboxing [4].
or use my portable-arch repository: https://github.com/Kraftland/portable- arch. Portable also supports most distros following FHS, not just Arch.
Given the weak rationale presented above, this comes across more as a self-promotion attempt, including in the wiki earlier this month [5]. Such self-promotion in Arch mailing lists or the Arch wiki is generally not appreciated and discouraged [6].
EDIT: Huh the original sender is gone.
[1] https://archlinux.org/packages/?name=flatpak [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Flatpak [3] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Security [4] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Security#Sandboxing_applications [5] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Security&diff=prev&oldid=846502 [6] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=List_of_applications/Utilities&di... -- Regards, Robin Candau / Antiz
Hi concierge9156
I’m an ordinary user who relies on the sandboxing packages from the AUR. To my surprise, *a large number of these packages have been removed* and the maintainer now points us to a separate PKGBUILD repository.
According to the *AUR submission guidelines*, the AUR (and official repos) are meant for “packages which install general software and software‑related content, including … configuration file(s).” Sandbox packages are precisely *configuration files that provide unique, valuable features* for many users.
As explained to Kimiblock, the maintainer of many of all the sandboxed packages recently deleted:
The sandboxed packages you refer are merely the same exact softwares, usually unpatched, with a different packaging around.
There's not any action against the sandboxed packages at all, they simply were duplicated packages with a different packaging method, an invalid reason to upload a duplicated packages in the AUR. Also:
For this reason I invite you to use the wiki to document how to apply a sandbox the softwares, instead of having the same packages multiple times with different packaging and maintainers.
If you mean to sandbox your applications use the wiki to get how to package them for you but avoid to create duplicated packages for every possible existing ways to re-packages a software. Best regards -- Muflone
participants (5)
-
concierge9156
-
Kimiblock Moe
-
Muflone
-
Robin Candau
-
Stephanos Pavlou