[aur-general] VirtualBox in [community]
In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2: virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions. What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be removed from [community] without moving it to AUR. And it would be nice if virtualbox-ext-oracle (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44761) would be moved to [community], too, so that virtualbox is completely in [community] with all its features. And, btw., does it really make sense to split virtualbox? I mean in most cases the virtualbox-guest-additions and virtualbox-guest-modules are needed for running virtualbox or the guests anyway. Heiko
On 12/27/2010 02:56 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2:
virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64)
In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions.
virtualbox, virtualbox-guest-addions, virtualbox-guest-modules are split from virtualbox and you'll find them in /var/abs/community/virtualbox
What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be removed from [community] without moving it to AUR.
no. the descriptions is wrong from virtualbox-guest-additions and it was fixed in -3
And it would be nice if virtualbox-ext-oracle (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44761) would be moved to [community], too, so that virtualbox is completely in [community] with all its features.
no
And, btw., does it really make sense to split virtualbox? I mean in most cases the virtualbox-guest-additions and virtualbox-guest-modules are needed for running virtualbox or the guests anyway.
yes. a lot of users are using the guest additions provided in the repos instead of installing them as described in the manual. -- Ionuț
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 13:56 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2:
virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64)
In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions.
What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be removed from [community] without moving it to AUR.
virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest.
And it would be nice if virtualbox-ext-oracle (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44761) would be moved to [community], too, so that virtualbox is completely in [community] with all its features.
Isn't there licensing issues with these? Or have those been resolved by Oracle?
On 12/28/10 at 11:40am, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 13:56 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2:
virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64)
In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions.
What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be removed from [community] without moving it to AUR.
virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest.
And it would be nice if virtualbox-ext-oracle (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44761) would be moved to [community], too, so that virtualbox is completely in [community] with all its features.
Isn't there licensing issues with these? Or have those been resolved by Oracle?
Yes, the USB2.0 features are licensend so we can' t package them in [community], still the TU' s have done a good job ;)
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 11:40:31 +0800 Ng Oon-Ee <ngoonee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 13:56 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2:
virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64)
In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions.
What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be removed from [community] without moving it to AUR.
virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest.
why not call the former virtualbox-additions-image or something? a name like that is miles clearer, imho. Dieter
On 12/28/2010 12:55 PM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 11:40:31 +0800 Ng Oon-Ee<ngoonee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 13:56 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2:
virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64)
In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions.
What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be removed from [community] without moving it to AUR.
virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest.
why not call the former virtualbox-additions-image or something? a name like that is miles clearer, imho.
Dieter
historical reasons and i didn't bothered changing. I admit that now virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 doesn't have a good description but that was fixed in trunk. the name of the package doesn't really matter. Descriptions are important in this case. -- Ionuț
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:59:45 +0200 Ionuț Bîru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 12/28/2010 12:55 PM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 11:40:31 +0800 Ng Oon-Ee<ngoonee@gmail.com> wrote:
virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest.
why not call the former virtualbox-additions-image or something? a name like that is miles clearer, imho.
Dieter
historical reasons and i didn't bothered changing. I admit that now virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 doesn't have a good description but that was fixed in trunk.
the name of the package doesn't really matter. Descriptions are important in this case.
descriptions are a good way to give additional info, but it makes no sense to keep the packagename itself vague and force people to read the description when that could be easily avoided. especially in this case the packagenames are very confusing. I would rename as follows: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-additions-image virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions or to be extra clear: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-guest-additions-image virtualbox-guest-additions stays virtualbox-guest-additions Dieter
Am Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:09:15 +0100 schrieb Dieter Plaetinck <dieter@plaetinck.be>:
I would rename as follows: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-additions-image virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions
or to be extra clear: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-guest-additions-image virtualbox-guest-additions stays virtualbox-guest-additions
I would suggest these names as they are clearer: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-guest-additions This implies that these are the additions for all supported guests and it's Oracle's official name for that. It's delivered by Oracle as an iso anyway. So no need for an additional -image or -iso in the name. virtualbox-additions could be confused with virtualbox-ext-oracle. virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-arch-guest-additions, virtualbox-guest-arch-additions or something like that This would explain that those additions are at least Arch specific. The package descriptions should, of course, emphasize this. Heiko
Am Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:59:33 +0100 schrieb Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de>:
I would suggest these names as they are clearer:
virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-guest-additions
This implies that these are the additions for all supported guests and it's Oracle's official name for that. It's delivered by Oracle as an iso anyway. So no need for an additional -image or -iso in the name.
virtualbox-additions could be confused with virtualbox-ext-oracle.
virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-arch-guest-additions, virtualbox-guest-arch-additions or something like that
This would explain that those additions are at least Arch specific.
Probably it would be even better to remove the packages virtualbox-guest-additions and virtualbox-guest-modules completely as Arch Linux is fully supported by the installation script of the iso installed by virtualbox-additions. And the guest additions installed by this script are working perfectly out of the box on Arch Linux guests. Heiko
On 28 December 2010 19:09, Dieter Plaetinck <dieter@plaetinck.be> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:59:45 +0200 Ionuț Bîru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 12/28/2010 12:55 PM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 11:40:31 +0800 Ng Oon-Ee<ngoonee@gmail.com> wrote:
virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest.
why not call the former virtualbox-additions-image or something? a name like that is miles clearer, imho.
Dieter
historical reasons and i didn't bothered changing. I admit that now virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 doesn't have a good description but that was fixed in trunk.
the name of the package doesn't really matter. Descriptions are important in this case.
descriptions are a good way to give additional info, but it makes no sense to keep the packagename itself vague and force people to read the description when that could be easily avoided. especially in this case the packagenames are very confusing.
I would rename as follows: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-additions-image virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions
or to be extra clear: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-guest-additions-image virtualbox-guest-additions stays virtualbox-guest-additions
+1 Naming should always be thought out carefully if not already apparent or dictated (by upstream), in the event there is confusion with one or more packages. In this case, there _is_ confusion. The following should clear it all out: virtualbox-additions -> virtualbox-guest-additions (consistent with upstream and history) desc: "The VirtualBox Guest Additions ISO/CD image" virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions-linux ('guest' not important; shall be implied by description) desc: "Additions for Linux guests (userspace tools)" virtualbox-guest-modules -> virtualbox-modules-linux (as above) desc: "Additions for Linux guests (kernel modules) And also, IMO, in AUR: virtualbox-ext-oracle -> virtualbox-extension-pack desc: "The Oracle VM VirtualBox Extension Pack" On 28 December 2010 20:06, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
Probably it would be even better to remove the packages virtualbox-guest-additions and virtualbox-guest-modules completely as Arch Linux is fully supported by the installation script of the iso installed by virtualbox-additions. And the guest additions installed by this script are working perfectly out of the box on Arch Linux guests.
No. The additions CD image can be bloat to some people only running vbox with an (arch)linux guest.
Am Tue, 28 Dec 2010 22:49:32 +0800 schrieb Ray Rashif <schiv@archlinux.org>:
virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions-linux ('guest' not important; shall be implied by description) desc: "Additions for Linux guests (userspace tools)"
virtualbox-guest-modules -> virtualbox-modules-linux (as above) desc: "Additions for Linux guests (kernel modules)
...
No. The additions CD image can be bloat to some people only running vbox with an (arch)linux guest.
But wouldn't this be a bit better? virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions-archlinux ('guest' not important; shall be implied by description) desc: "Additions for Arch Linux guests (userspace tools)" virtualbox-guest-modules -> virtualbox-modules-archlinux (as above) desc: "Additions for Arch Linux guests (kernel modules)" At least the latter one is Arch Linux specific, because it requires kernel26 (_kernver=2.6.36-ARCH in the PKGBUILD) and installs the modules only for this kernel. Heiko
What about like this: Name: virtualbox Desc: powerfull and easy to use virtualizing app. Name: virtualbox-guest-mudules Desc: virtualbox guest system dribers and tools for stock arch kernel. Name: virtualbox-additions-cd Desc: Cd-image containing additional drivers and tools for virtualbox guest OSes.
Am Tue, 28 Dec 2010 18:33:26 +0200 schrieb jesse jaara <jesse.jaara@gmail.com>:
What about like this:
Name: virtualbox Desc: powerfull and easy to use virtualizing app.
Name: virtualbox-guest-mudules Desc: virtualbox guest system dribers and tools for stock arch kernel.
Name: virtualbox-additions-cd Desc: Cd-image containing additional drivers and tools for virtualbox guest OSes.
Not so good. See Ray's explanations. Heiko
On 29 December 2010 00:24, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
Am Tue, 28 Dec 2010 22:49:32 +0800 schrieb Ray Rashif <schiv@archlinux.org>:
virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions-linux ('guest' not important; shall be implied by description) desc: "Additions for Linux guests (userspace tools)"
virtualbox-guest-modules -> virtualbox-modules-linux (as above) desc: "Additions for Linux guests (kernel modules)
...
No. The additions CD image can be bloat to some people only running vbox with an (arch)linux guest.
But wouldn't this be a bit better?
virtualbox-guest-additions -> virtualbox-additions-archlinux ('guest' not important; shall be implied by description) desc: "Additions for Arch Linux guests (userspace tools)"
virtualbox-guest-modules -> virtualbox-modules-archlinux (as above) desc: "Additions for Arch Linux guests (kernel modules)"
They're actually distro-independent. We just build, (re)package and move stuff around to the proper directories fit for whatever distro we use. Anyway, it's not wrong - either linux or archlinux serves the purpose here.
On 12/28/2010 05:40 AM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 13:56 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
In the [community] repo there are the following packages in addition to the package virtualbox 4.0.0-2:
virtualbox-additions 4.0.0-1 (any) virtualbox-guest-additions 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64) virtualbox-guest-modules 4.0.0-2 (i686 and x86_64)
In ABS there's only virtualbox-additions.
What is what package? And is virtualbox-additions a duplicate of virtualbox-guest-additions? If yes, it would be nice, if this could be removed from [community] without moving it to AUR.
virtualbox-additions is the iso to install guest additions inside the virtual machine (win or any linux), virtualbox-guest-additions is to install the additions inside an Arch guest.
And it would be nice if virtualbox-ext-oracle (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44761) would be moved to [community], too, so that virtualbox is completely in [community] with all its features.
Isn't there licensing issues with these? Or have those been resolved by Oracle?
the whole point of splitting the usb 2.0 support was to have a gpl binary. If using their method to install that, the user have to agree to a license agreement -- Ionuț
participants (7)
-
Dieter Plaetinck
-
Heiko Baums
-
Ionuț Bîru
-
Jelle van der Waa
-
jesse jaara
-
Ng Oon-Ee
-
Ray Rashif