I am still failing to see how mingw exception is relevant to the case. I have to ask a very simple question: yay-git package, the most voted package in AUR, is building for both x86 & arm, and running on both of them (even on more architectures) https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=yay mesa-panfork-git is building for both x86 & arm, and *RUNNING* on both of them https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=mesa-panfork-git How one should justify yay-git should not be deleted from AUR but mesa-panfork-git should be deleted. What is the difference? Mingw? On 11/18/23 15:03, Marcell Meszaros wrote:
Is there any rule saying that packages do build on x86 but meant to be used in non-x86 is supposed to be deleted? Only builds that create packages for Microsoft Windows are explicitly accepted (MinGW package guidelines [1]), and also compile toolchains that run on Arch Linux x86_64 but create binaries for other architectures (Cross-compiling tools package guidelines [2]).
Other than that, there is no other allowance in Arch Wiki. Articles there about ARM and Arch Linux ARM, for example [3] firmly get redirected to Arch Linux Terms / Code of Conduct / "Arch Linux distribution support ONLY". [4]
[1]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/MinGW_package_guidelines [2]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Cross-compiling_tools_package_guidelines [3]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1&search=arm [4]: https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#arch-linux-distribution-su...
On 18 November 2023 14:32:42 GMT+01:00, "Hüseyin BIYIK" <boogiepop(a)gmx.com> wrote:
On 11/15/23 00:29, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote:
FabioLolix [1] filed a deletion request for mesa-panfork-git [2]:
While this have x86_64 in arch=() is in fact ARM specific. From Is there any rule saying that packages do build on x86 but meant to be used in non-x86 is supposed to be deleted?
pkgdesc "Mesa with Panfrost that supports Mali G610/G710 GPUs (Valhall v10 CSF)", from internal comment "Removed Gallium3D drivers/packages for chipsets that don't exist in our ARM devices (intel, VMware svga)", untouched since 11 months This means that package is working, not necessarily it is broken. Why the deletion request?