[PRQ#68164] Deletion Request for wechat-universal-bwrap
MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for wechat-universal-bwrap [2]: 'universal' is not a relevant pkgname qualifier. It is just a directory name on upstream's distribution server. [a] Duplicate of AUR/wechat, which uses the same download URL. The latter package is also configured in a way that lets users choose whether they want to use it with or without bwrap. [a]: https://dldir1v6.qq.com/weixin/Universal/Linux/WeChatLinux_arm64.deb [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/wechat-universal-bwrap/
'universal' is not a relevant pkgname qualifier. It is just a
MarsSeed: Please don't file requests to a package that mainly Chinese are using with only researches done in English-focused Internet searching. directory name on upstream's distribution server. "Universal" IS the upstream marketing name, search "微信 Universal" and you'll see relevant CHINESE news, one example is ithome's news report[a] posted in March 2024 and you can see the listed name in UOS (a Linux distro owned and maintained by Chinese company ChinaUOS for to-business usage) and KylinOS (another Linux distro owned and maintained by Chinese company GalaxyKylin for to-business usage) are definitely "微信 (Universal)". And it's still the case if you get a copy of these distros. Tencent does not use randomly "Universal" in the download link without a reason: it is their marketing name for this version of client from the beginning and they've switched both their Windows and MacOS versions to the same base and thus it is also "universal" in the real sense. They've been sticking with the strict "Universal" spelling with an upper case U and lower case "niversal" and they just don't market it publicly in their own website as it's already the name used in fact.
Duplicate of AUR/wechat, which uses the same download URL.
The latter package is also configured in a way that lets users choose whether they want to use it with or without bwrap.
wechat-universal-bwrap provides bubblewrap sandboxing and its behaviour is much different from the official wechat-universal client. Please read through the wrapper[b] and it's not hard to figure out the reason why that sandboxing is needed: 1. Tencent is greedily collecting user data and an open root or home folder should be avoided if you don't want your data to be scanned over and over again; 2: Tencent is not following FHS and they put the data everywhere and the wrapper centralizes the user data into a single folder definable by user 3: Tencent is using a hard-coded order to implement their "Open in Folder" functionality and it needs to be wrapped around unless you want deepin-file-manager/nautilus to be popped up on your KDE session or vice-versa. 4: Tencent is doing device verification and a shared library workaround[c] is needed if user want to login freshly on a non-UOS non-Kylin non-TencentOpenCloud Linux distro and do not have their account marked on Tencent server as valid Linus users. 5. It provides the functionality to close the app in App-Right-click menu the official app does not provide and it's essential if users do not have a tray e.g. when they're using a WM instead of a DE. It is not a duplicate and it has its own meaning and usage and it's also why it has gotten 112 votes: the package is not even the first recommendation by AUR helpers if you search wechat, a huge amount of Chinese Arch users are actively, explicitly searching and installing wechat-universal-bwrap, users would be frustrated if you just delete wechat-universal-bwrap and expect them happily migrate to AUR/wechat. If anything, it is AUR/wechat that's not sticking to what it should provide: a binary-only package should only provide simply the repackaged binary, not doing anything more. But it is in fact using a different way[d] to start Wechat instead of the official way, and many users hate the way how that's handled. The favored AUR/wechat-bin way [e] (just use a fixed .Application file to start the binary) is what it should be using, and that's why people are contantly re-pushing AUR/wechat-bin even after you've sent a request to delete it. If you really want a cleaner AUR, go find a way to fix AUR/wechat to improve the situation, otherwise you're just worsening the situation. [a]: https://ithome.com/0/755/450.htm [b]: https://github.com/7Ji-PKGBUILDs/wechat-universal-bwrap/blob/master/wechat-u... [c]: https://github.com/7Ji-PKGBUILDs/wechat-universal-bwrap/blob/master/libuosde... [d]: https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/wechat.sh?h=wechat&id=3fd2d1ede02179555ff6f02b5d0ec78198fbfb1f [e]: https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=wechat-bin&id=f865b12651639620309d585319530edfb60cab44#n33
Request #68164 has been Rejected by Muflone [1]: this was discussed multiple times, people have different opinions about these two packages [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Muflone/
participants (2)
-
7Ji
-
notify@aur.archlinux.org