- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Qdevelop modification
by Shaika-Dzari 08 May '08

08 May '08

Hello everyone. I maintain qdevelop package in Aur. Since 0.25.2, the source did not compile. See comments : http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14930 I made a bug report and provide the solution ibsen-aur gave me but there are no new version out there and my bugreport did not have any response from qdevelop author since 6 weeks. A user suggested to add this line in the pkgbuild to solve the problem: sed -i -e "s/free(allinherits)/delete [] allinherits/" src/QIComplete/tree.cpp Is it alright to do this? I can do a patch if it's a better (and more standard) solution. Thanks you. -- Shaika-Dzari http://www.guidelinux.org http://code.google.com/p/animeshell

2 1

Re: [aur-general] TU Vote - Dragonlord
by w9ya＠qrparci.net 07 May '08

07 May '08

> Hi TUs, > > This begins the 7 day voting thread for the addition of Dragonlord > (Jaroslav Lichtblau) as a TU, don't forget to vote. You can see his > introduction and the discussion period here: > > http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2008-May/007530.html > > I vote YES. > > Cheers, > Allan > > -- > Allan McRae > Arch Linux Trusted User I also vote yes Very best regards; Bob Finch Liviu Librescu - În veci pomenirea lui. (May his memory be eternal.)

1 0

[aur-general] Wanted: courier-mta maintainer
by Tobias Kieslich 07 May '08

07 May '08

Hi guys. I'm currently the maintainer of all courier* related stuff. I was using the courier mailserver on my own machine including a full fledged versiom of courier-mta. However, I recently fell for a dovecot/tarmail combo, and not using courier-mta myself makes maintainance harder and way more error prone. I will be able to maintain it for a while because changes happen gradually, and there is also no question that courier-imap stays in extra. But we are looking for a courier-mta maintainer in extra otherwise we will drop it down to community in time. Just answer to that thread if you have experience with courier-mta and are willing to maintain it for Archlinux. Thanks, -Tobias

1 0

[aur-general] TU Voting On The AUR
by Xavier 07 May '08

07 May '08

Hello, I am curious why no one is interested in this : http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/tur-users/2008-February/007020.html Besides many other advantages like automation and anonymity, it should remove noise on this ML and prevent non-TU from voting. But maybe that's where the fun is (old school ftw) :) Otherwise, if there was a real interest, then finishing that project shouldn't be a big problem.

4 5

[aur-general] Initial voting testing in AUR - Dragonlord
by Douglas Andrade 07 May '08

07 May '08

Hi TUs, I created a voting thread in AUR for Dragonlord. Please vote there and in this ML, so we can test the voting process in AUR, and if we all like it, we could start to benefit from Callan work and use it in the next voting process. Thanks

2 2

Re: [aur-general] amendment bylaws: voting & tur-users
by Timm Preetz 07 May '08

07 May '08

On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 23:09 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > As a query, can we see who has voted for a proposal. We might start > running into quorum issues if we can't track who has voted and give > those who don't a boot (a bit pessimistic I know, but probably > justified...) I think it is possible to find out who has voted (otherwise you could vote twice), not sure who can actually see this. Maybe make that public after the vote is closed, to give an overview.

1 0

[aur-general] Inclusion of ChangeLog Files
by Dennis Craven 07 May '08

07 May '08

Hi list, I often find it useful (as do many I'm sure) to keep ChangeLog files up to date when maintaining things like Arch packages etc. Is it bad practice to include this file in the tarball submitted to the AUR? Cheers, ~djc

8 10

[aur-general] Helixplayer
by Tony Dodd 07 May '08

07 May '08

Hey All, The version of helixplayer that's in community is both orphaned and extremely old. Is a TU planning to adopt this, or can it be kicked back into unsupported? Thanks Tony

2 3

[aur-general] makepkg and unzip
by Xavier 07 May '08

07 May '08

Hello, I am not sure if it's widely known that makepkg 3.1 now uses bsdtar for extracting .zip sources. I see many PKGBUILDs still have makedepends=(unzip) while unzip is in fact never used. It was often discussed before whether that makedepends line was required or not. eg : http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=5280 Now the situation is clearer, since unzip is no longer used by makepkg. So the makedepends line can be safely removed. There might be some special zip files that are not handled (correctly) by bsdtar. In that case, it's probably a good idea to contact both bsdtar maintainer and the creators of the zip archive about the problem. To work around it, you can use noextract and call unzip manually like in that example : http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/9792?getfile=2016 (in that pkgbuild, unzip is put in makedepends, and I think it's correct) If the above makes sense, and is not yet mentioned in the wiki, and someone finds a relevant place to add it, then go for it :)

8 14

[aur-general] orphan request: libopensync-plugins
by Hauke Wesselmann 07 May '08

07 May '08

Could you please orphan libopensync-plugin-moto, libopensync-plugin-python and libopensync-plugin-vformat. These packages were last updated in October 2007. All of them are flagged out-of-date as newer versions are available since january. I have tried to contact the maintainer via AUR. When he did not answer after a while I contacted him by mail and did not get a response to date(I have sent my mail about 4 weeks ago). Thanks in advance Hauke

2 1