On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 09:38:30PM +0200, Robert Knauer wrote:

...

Hello, please disown nvidia-pae[1], it's outdated for more than a month now and I mailed the maintainer on 1st of September and got no answer.

Thanks, Robert

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=40101

Don't take this personally... you're just the one who happened to bring it up. Do we _really_ need all this duplication? Does every kernel in the AUR needs its own _from_ _source_ instructions to build kernel modules? Really, these should all be about 3-4 lines to change in the extra/nvidia PKGBUILD. Instead, we have...

nvidia-apparmor nvidia-bede nvidia-bfs nvidia-bl nvidia-ck nvidia-custom nvidia-fbcondecor nvidia-ice nvidia-ll nvidia-lqx nvidia-mainline nvidia-pae nvidia-pf nvidia-rifs nvidia-rt nvidia-uksm nvidia-zen

I'm sure these are all unique and beautiful in their own way, but really, they're all duplicates as far as I'm concerned. nvidia is the biggest offender of this, but it certainly applies to other modules as well.

</rant>

dave

Firstly - full disclosure - I'm the author and maintainer of the hackish nvidia-beta-all package (someone else based nvidia-all from that). It basically builds the nvidia module for every exiting kernel (including specific patches if needed). When initially submitting the package there was some discussion about whether such a PKGBUILD which is non-reproducable (would produce different results on different machines) violates the AUR's guidelines. The only alternative to that (if reproducability is important) would be the various nvidia packages as we currently have. Of course, I never really agreed with that line of reasoning simply because as it is compiling any random package on two different machines could produce different results due to autotools or similar.