[aur-general] List of comminity64 failures?
Is there a list of packages that can not be put in community64 due to build failures/binary package etc? I had a look through the wiki and found http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_ToDoS which has no community info. Looking at the pkg diff page (http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html) there are ~60 packages in i686 community but not in x86_64 community. There is only 1 in x86_64 but not in i686 which is not a lib32 package. I'm going to spend some time shortening this list but I'm sure some of these are legitimately only i686. As an aside, something is wrong with the matching in the pkg_diff page. Some packages appear twice in the list, once with a missing i686 version and once with a missing x86_64 version. I think this is when the is a major version difference between the platforms. e.g. gambas2 & yaz. Cheers, Allan
Allan McRae wrote:
Is there a list of packages that can not be put in community64 due to build failures/binary package etc? I had a look through the wiki and found http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_ToDoS which has no community info. Looking at the pkg diff page (http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html) there are ~60 packages in i686 community but not in x86_64 community. There is only 1 in x86_64 but not in i686 which is not a lib32 package. I'm going to spend some time shortening this list but I'm sure some of these are legitimately only i686.
As an aside, something is wrong with the matching in the pkg_diff page. Some packages appear twice in the list, once with a missing i686 version and once with a missing x86_64 version. I think this is when the is a major version difference between the platforms. e.g. gambas2 & yaz.
Replying to my own post... I found this: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community64_Status. It was old and unused so I have changed it to have the current package differences there. Can people add reasons for these packages not be in x86_64 (if there is one). It will save me from having to look at every package individually. Cheers, Allan
Also some of the packages have an incorrect group name, for example a package in system was actually written in multimedia or something like that. There are also some packages which are actually architecture-independent but still have version differences between i686 and x86_64. I've updated most of them but a few stray ones may be lying around. (example: openoffice-spell* packages) -- Abhishek
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
Is there a list of packages that can not be put in community64 due to build failures/binary package etc? I had a look through the wiki and found http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_ToDoS which has no community info. Looking at the pkg diff page (http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html) there are ~60 packages in i686 community but not in x86_64 community. There is only 1 in x86_64 but not in i686 which is not a lib32 package. I'm going to spend some time shortening this list but I'm sure some of these are legitimately only i686.
As an aside, something is wrong with the matching in the pkg_diff page. Some packages appear twice in the list, once with a missing i686 version and once with a missing x86_64 version. I think this is when the is a major version difference between the platforms. e.g. gambas2 & yaz.
Replying to my own post... I found this: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community64_Status. It was old and unused so I have changed it to have the current package differences there. Can people add reasons for these packages not be in x86_64 (if there is one). It will save me from having to look at every package individually.
Cheers, Allan
I'm aware of several (if not most) of these build issues. I'll add to the list tonight. You might want to wait for my input before going through each individual packages. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Eric Belanger wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
Is there a list of packages that can not be put in community64 due to build failures/binary package etc? I had a look through the wiki and found http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_ToDoS which has no community info. Looking at the pkg diff page (http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html) there are ~60 packages in i686 community but not in x86_64 community. There is only 1 in x86_64 but not in i686 which is not a lib32 package. I'm going to spend some time shortening this list but I'm sure some of these are legitimately only i686.
As an aside, something is wrong with the matching in the pkg_diff page. Some packages appear twice in the list, once with a missing i686 version and once with a missing x86_64 version. I think this is when the is a major version difference between the platforms. e.g. gambas2 & yaz.
Replying to my own post... I found this: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community64_Status. It was old and unused so I have changed it to have the current package differences there. Can people add reasons for these packages not be in x86_64 (if there is one). It will save me from having to look at every package individually.
Cheers, Allan
I'm aware of several (if not most) of these build issues. I'll add to the list tonight. You might want to wait for my input before going through each individual packages.
I added what I knew. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Eric Belanger wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Eric Belanger wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
Replying to my own post... I found this: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community64_Status. It was old and unused so I have changed it to have the current package differences there. Can people add reasons for these packages not be in x86_64 (if there is one). It will save me from having to look at every package individually.
I'm aware of several (if not most) of these build issues. I'll add to the list tonight. You might want to wait for my input before going through each individual packages.
I added what I knew.
Thanks. It looks like there are a few packages there that should work so I will attempt to get these building/running over the next few days. What are the holidays for if not to build packages :)
Allan McRae wrote:
Is there a list of packages that can not be put in community64 due to build failures/binary package etc? I had a look through the wiki and found http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_ToDoS which has no community info. Looking at the pkg diff page (http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html) there are ~60 packages in i686 community but not in x86_64 community. There is only 1 in x86_64 but not in i686 which is not a lib32 package. I'm going to spend some time shortening this list but I'm sure some of these are legitimately only i686.
As an aside, something is wrong with the matching in the pkg_diff page. Some packages appear twice in the list, once with a missing i686 version and once with a missing x86_64 version. I think this is when the is a major version difference between the platforms. e.g. gambas2 & yaz.
Cheers, Allan
http://never.mortals.dy.fi/nogo.txt Very old list from times when there was no official community on x86_64 Still kinda inactive as final exams are going on. Last one will be next week. After that I rest a little and the next week will be a trip to London (free transportation for me so not going to pass). Also cant find a way to set myself inactive in AUR webpages.
participants (4)
-
Abhishek Dasgupta
-
Allan McRae
-
Eric Belanger
-
Mikko Seppälä