June 2013 - Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Removal request
by Jakub Klinkovský 23 Jun '13

23 Jun '13

Hi, from [1]: Support for the features in xf86-video-fbdev-for-displaylink and udlfb from the AUR have been included upstream and are no longer needed. Use the official packages instead. xf86-video-fbdev-for-displaylink [2] has a maintainer, but udlfb [3] is orphaned, so I think it's fine to remove it. [1]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DisplayLink [2]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xf86-video-fbdev-for-displaylink/ [3]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/udlfb/

2 1

[aur-general] Merge requests
by Sébastien Leduc 22 Jun '13

22 Jun '13

Hello, Could you please merge: python2-pipeline [1] into python2-grapevine [2] and python-pipeline [3] into python-grapevine [4] ? The project changed its name upstream so 'grapevine' replaces 'pipeline'. Thanks. 1: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python2-pipeline/ 2: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python2-grapevine/ 3: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-pipeline/ 4: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-grapevine/

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 22 Jun '13

22 Jun '13

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 18 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 20 packages missing signoffs * 2 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (18 total) == * bbswitch-0.7-3 (i686) * cdfs-2.6.27-47 (i686) * ndiswrapper-1.58-13 (i686) * open-vm-tools-modules-1:9.2.3-5 (i686) * r8168-8.035.00-15 (i686) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-33 (i686) * tp_smapi-0.41-24 (i686) * vhba-module-20130607-3 (i686) * virtualbox-modules-4.2.12-9 (i686) * bbswitch-0.7-3 (x86_64) * cdfs-2.6.27-47 (x86_64) * ndiswrapper-1.58-13 (x86_64) * open-vm-tools-modules-1:9.2.3-5 (x86_64) * r8168-8.035.00-15 (x86_64) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-33 (x86_64) * tp_smapi-0.41-24 (x86_64) * vhba-module-20130607-3 (x86_64) * virtualbox-modules-4.2.12-9 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (20 total) == * bbswitch-0.7-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * cdfs-2.6.27-47 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * ndiswrapper-1.58-13 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * open-vm-tools-modules-1:9.2.3-5 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.035.00-15 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-33 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-24 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20130607-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.2.12-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.7-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * cdfs-2.6.27-47 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * ndiswrapper-1.58-13 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * open-vm-tools-modules-1:9.2.3-5 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.035.00-15 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-33 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-24 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20130607-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.2.12-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (i686), since 2013-05-28 * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (x86_64), since 2013-05-28 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. foutrelis - 3 signoffs 2. tomegun - 1 signoffs 3. andyrtr - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Multiple requests
by Karol Blazewicz 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

Merge: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/csv2json/ with https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/csv2json-git/notify/ It gets the code from git in both cases, so I guess the author and sumbitter decided to name it properly. Spam by joyoauto Found one more comment: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/boost-build-config What do we do about packages that host binaries in the AUR e.g. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sub32/ , https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/evolution-statusicon/ or https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/kio-sysinfo/ ? "I am a robot. AUR guidelines suggest to not include binaries." What is the current policy, are a few icons OK?

2 1

[aur-general] Removal requests
by Karol Blazewicz 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

2 1

[aur-general] Removal requests
by Karol Blazewicz 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 0 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 2 packages missing signoffs * 2 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (2 total) == * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (i686), since 2013-05-28 * shapelib-1.3.0-2 (x86_64), since 2013-05-28 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. tomegun - 4 signoffs 2. bpiotrowski - 2 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] AUR cleanup policy
by Karol Blazewicz 20 Jun '13

20 Jun '13

What's the policy wrt to packages that have been submitted years ago and are neither developed upstream nor maintained in the AUR since then? Just let them be or get rid of them as they're of no use? If there're old unmaintained packages foo and foo-git, is it OK to request removing at least one of them? Which one? https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/a4/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/a4-bzr/ The PKGBUILD need updating but it still builds and runs so I can pick it up, update and orphan it. I don't know which filetypes does it open (.odp is not recognized) and the editor doesn't work, so you can't create a new presentation from scratch. It's man page is of no help.

6 10

[aur-general] Orphaned and outdated haskell packages
by Karol Blazewicz 20 Jun '13

20 Jun '13

There's over 200 packages submitted by arch-haskell that are marked out of date and are not maintained anymore. Some of them have been updated in the past year, so maybe there's no need to remove them, I'm just reporting something I noticed. Some packages were hosting their source on github e.g. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/haskell-warp/ and they now returns 404.

4 6

[aur-general] Removal Request
by Edoardo Maria Elidoro 20 Jun '13

20 Jun '13

Hi everyone, I found this useless and orphan package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xfce-utils-4.8.3/ I think it needs to be removed from AUR. Thanks, Edoardo

2 1