[aur-general] virtualbox-extension-pack vs. virtualbox-ext-oracle
Hello everybody, following a lengthy discussion sublu just deleted my package virtualbox-extension-pack from AUR. This is what his package (virtualbox-ext-oracle) does: * Install an archive file. * Use install script to copy a number of files to /usr without pacman knowing about it. I think this is the wrong way, so I created my own package (virtualbox-extension-pack) that tries to get it right: * Just install the files required, "ready to use" for virtualbox. * No crappy install script required! My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more if more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of comments that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files to /usr with pacman or the install script. Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via AUR. But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there? -- main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH" "CX:;",b;for(a/* Chris get my mail address: */=0;b=c[a++];) putchar(b-1/(/* gcc -o sig sig.c && ./sig */b/42*2-3)*42);}
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Christian Hesse
My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more if more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of comments that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files to /usr with pacman or the install script.
Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via AUR. But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there?
For what it's worth, I (a regular Arch Linux user) support this package, I think it's the best way to install this extension pack, and was a bit amazed that someone with a "competitive" package could delete this one. Kind regards, Marcel BTW, his nick is 'seblu', not 'sublu', as Christian Hesse typoed.
Hi, I didn't vote for any package I'm using from AUR. Perhaps it's a mistake. Here the package of choice is virtualbox-extension-pack. $ pacman -Q virtualbox-extension-pack virtualbox-extension-pack 4.3.12-1 $ ls /var/cache/aur/virtualbox-extension-pack* /var/cache/aur/virtualbox-extension-pack-4.3.10-2-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz /var/cache/aur/virtualbox-extension-pack-4.3.12-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz /var/cache/aur/virtualbox-extension-pack-4.3.14-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz /var/cache/aur/virtualbox-extension-pack-4.3.14-2-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz Currently downgraded regarding to https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/41424 . The package shouldn't be deleted. Regards, Ralf -- The natural scientists Fritz Haber, Otto Hahn, James Franck and Gustav Hertz established poison gas for military usage and later they were decorated with the Nobelpreis.
Le lundi 4 août 2014, 18:15:32 Christian Hesse a écrit :
Hello everybody,
following a lengthy discussion sublu just deleted my package virtualbox-extension-pack from AUR. This is what his package (virtualbox-ext-oracle) does:
* Install an archive file. * Use install script to copy a number of files to /usr without pacman knowing about it.
I think this is the wrong way, so I created my own package (virtualbox-extension-pack) that tries to get it right:
* Just install the files required, "ready to use" for virtualbox. * No crappy install script required!
My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more if more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of comments that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files to /usr with pacman or the install script.
Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via AUR. But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there?
I've checked both packages, then i've also checked virtualbox documentation.
Documentation is available at http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/
* Ch8.36. VBoxManage extpack *
<
Even if the script is the recommended way, shouldn't the package be
designed so that it will track all of its files? Having a post install
script that places files through your filesystem feels like a dirty hack at
the best of times.
Regards,
Justin Dray
E: justin@dray.be
M: 0433348284
On 05/08/2014 7:13 am, "Laurent Carlier"
Le lundi 4 août 2014, 18:15:32 Christian Hesse a écrit :
Hello everybody,
following a lengthy discussion sublu just deleted my package virtualbox-extension-pack from AUR. This is what his package (virtualbox-ext-oracle) does:
* Install an archive file. * Use install script to copy a number of files to /usr without pacman knowing about it.
I think this is the wrong way, so I created my own package (virtualbox-extension-pack) that tries to get it right:
* Just install the files required, "ready to use" for virtualbox. * No crappy install script required!
My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more if more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of comments that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files to /usr with pacman or the install script.
Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via AUR. But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there?
I've checked both packages, then i've also checked virtualbox documentation. Documentation is available at http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ * Ch8.36. VBoxManage extpack * <
> In regards of VirtualBox docs, Seblu is installing extension pack the proper way. Your package isn't following upstream way to install extension package and you are not sure it will keep working, you are just lucky.
Your package is only a duplicated package of seblu's one, only differing on the way to install extension pack files isn't a good reason enough. Seblu was right to remove your package, there was an explanation before suppressing, rules were followed.
Nothing more to say. -- Laurent Carlier http://www.archlinux.org
Laurent Carlier
Le lundi 4 août 2014, 18:15:32 Christian Hesse a écrit :
Hello everybody,
following a lengthy discussion sublu just deleted my package virtualbox-extension-pack from AUR. This is what his package (virtualbox-ext-oracle) does:
* Install an archive file. * Use install script to copy a number of files to /usr without pacman knowing about it.
I think this is the wrong way, so I created my own package (virtualbox-extension-pack) that tries to get it right:
* Just install the files required, "ready to use" for virtualbox. * No crappy install script required!
My package had about 75 votes IIRC, probably there would have been more if more people knew about the details. The discussing had a number of comments that agreed about my opinion regarding installing/coping files to /usr with pacman or the install script.
Although I think it is wrong seblu is free to provide his package via AUR. But is there any good reason mine is not allowed to reside there?
I've checked both packages, then i've also checked virtualbox documentation. Documentation is available at http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ * Ch8.36. VBoxManage extpack * <
> In regards of VirtualBox docs, Seblu is installing extension pack the proper way.
Mozilla provides a tarball named firefox-31.0.tar.bz2. We could make pacman install that, then use the install script to extract the package and run install.sh. No? What upstream recommends is a way that should work on all distribution, ignoring the distribution's tools. I do not think this is the way to follow if we can get it better. Files in /usr should be tracked by pacman, with some really rare exceptions only. In my opinion virtualbox or its dependencies are not.
Your package isn't following upstream way to install extension package and you are not sure it will keep working, you are just lucky.
I can update my package whenever upstream changes how things work. So what? Packages are modified all the time.
Your package is only a duplicated package of seblu's one, only differing on the way to install extension pack files isn't a good reason enough. Seblu was right to remove your package, there was an explanation before suppressing, rules were followed.
Nothing more to say.
I do not agree. This is pretty stupid. My package does not hurt anybody and a lot of people do want to use it. -- main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH" "CX:;",b;for(a/* Chris get my mail address: */=0;b=c[a++];) putchar(b-1/(/* gcc -o sig sig.c && ./sig */b/42*2-3)*42);}
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 08:25 +0200, Christian Hesse wrote:
I do not agree. This is pretty stupid. My package does not hurt anybody and a lot of people do want to use it.
It does offend the Arch Linux policy. I asked to downgrade VBox for the repositories, assumed a bug I experience should be an issue for others too, done at general mailing list after reporting the bug. "Comment by Sébastien Luttringer (seblu)-Monday,04 August 2014,22:53 GMT You could try to remove the oracle extension or install it correctly, without the underground way of virtualbox-extension-pack. That could help to remove the extension from the equation. In both case, the issue seems to not be package related and you should report that upstream." - https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/41424 IOW, if there's a bug caused by upstream's current version, that makes the software useless, Arch will provide broken software by the official repositories. The reason why I often heard from Debian users, that for their needs Arch isn't stable enough. IMO Arch is much more stable, than Debian is, but indeed, a few packages from time to time are very annoying and on my machine those packages are always the same packages. The IgnorePkg line for my /etc/pacman.conf is very long and some of those packages are listed there (not all of them), because I experienced several times that the versions provided by the repositories are broken. Other packages are completely removed from my machine, especially those with a completely ignorant upstream. Virtualbox is one of those packages listed in the IgnorePkg line for a very long time. And no, I don't report each bug for each software, I only report quasi all bugs for audio production software, this already is very time consuming. If I find some time, I will use another virtual machine and remove VBox. That's the freedom we users have got. For maintainers of packages that don't fit to Arch's policy, perhaps somebody does provide an open private repository. While I dislike arch's policy sometimes, it can be completely bad, since Arch still is the best distro for my needs, so I'll live with the few things I dislike.
Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack-4.3.14.vbox-extpack
- a collection of binaries for different architectures provided
by Oracle as a convinient and low-maintance way for distributing
- we really should append '-bin' to the package name.
Laurent Carlier
I've checked both packages, then i've also checked virtualbox documentation. Documentation is available at http://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ * Ch8.36. VBoxManage extpack * <
>
... and shifts the burden of maintenance to the user What about adding the package to community - readily packed/configured for the architecture in use - leaving out darwin/solaris/wintendo blobs Now, 'sudo pacman -Suy' takes care of it.
In regards of VirtualBox docs, Seblu is installing extension pack the proper way.
... and shifts the burden of maintance to the user Now, 'sudo pacman -Suy' takes care of it.
Your package isn't following upstream way to install extension package and you are not sure it will keep working, you are just lucky.
That's bullshit
participants (6)
-
Christian Hesse
-
Justin Dray
-
Laurent Carlier
-
Marcel Korpel
-
Ralf Mardorf
-
Rob Til Freedmen