- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] AUR 4 package search doesn't work
by Ralf Mardorf 05 Jul '15

05 Jul '15

Hi, when using the AUR 4 search machine for "Name, Description" or "Name" and "Out of Date All", the keyword "lightscribe" does find "4l", but it doesn't find "lightscribe" and "lightscribe-labeler". https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=lightscribe https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=nd&K=lightscribe&outdated=&SB=… Regards, Ralf Off-topic PS: Assumed for AUR 3 PKGBUILDs were available for 32-bit and 64-bit architecture, there were requests to make those split PKGBUILDs one for both architectures, does it make sense to provide the PKGBUILDs for AUR 4 with dropped 64-bit architecture and to provide 32-bit architecture only? We could argue that it's better somebody maintains 32-bit PKGBUILDs only, instead of completely dropping software, OTOH Arch claims to support 32-bit and 64-bit architecture and it looks like a step backwards to provide 32-bit architecture and to drop the newer 64-bit architecture. https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/lightscribe/ https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/lightscribe-labeler/ https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/4l/

3 5

[aur-general] pkgver update not reflected
by brent timothy saner 05 Jul '15

05 Jul '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On one of my packages [0], I've updated the PKGBUILD with pkgver 1.4.20. Previous release was 1.4.18. However, AUR(4) still seems to think the package version is 1.4.18, and even seems to apply it to when I use the ${pkgver} variable inline (e.g. for the sources). What gives? Is anyone else experiencing this? [0] https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/freeswitch/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVmYoSAAoJEIwATC+TSB9rHP8P/idCfJMgcgdLSVvFKYKktXti 9oUyuEtsdmsdVbr4NO5FIsaox9moQ8Ee6Q1vEe3FIhiaNiWx4LoLmENHeZPS6jcG 3M7Y725xsd0KLD2dhWwIVlzyuxkiZqM1u/6FbceHoTDgCNvRQLPKr2pDHQXpA6l9 YYE8mBgwcLdsIXA3Emt1/1suvah6IaLrJ1d0tMJasHo7VzhRh/+IB4oJ7SrNBj5S HUnbaaORpMBh+DNh9L7xTCjff1rbTwB0T38PtS5yZkqT7sFksBMam84vGjX3l1+h Cx4kDK7cWcfTS6Dhba9NJ37iNnMwRTD+AQqjg1c0ApYC3XI+vfLQXcfgC1G9SBdh zzHMt/0oNNA2/Wy4T6fxkcZeUTANSab2QM5/iLHLl1ayHVxR0pr+2JVPeo971I+0 RVkBj73C9ByzDwvMASoXMwhApl3GrOX1QfKhd8fDfRV/QjTpVN3fOIJbaHHa1yIA pg/OHYQUnqh85rvAix7rJAj5K+St92f0eEbFjPlxJMcI+FF+raNrbiY0SG4obGx8 uha7H8HVOqU8x2p05ieaJPDJxewS+Zi1iCaBfjBPTSJszG3xzGaj0KROqKVbmBC+ z9+V23Dq72OEgmtHG/eQrzyOG25Sm/tO8NXSfKl/v82tZAfbAAnsssbm8/BPe0JW 0nId7tKXA5FkFY3zmtyh =t1hi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 5

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 05 Jul '15

05 Jul '15

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 14 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 17 packages missing signoffs * 0 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 (14 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-31 (i686) * bbswitch-0.8-33 (i686) * r8168-8.040.00-3 (i686) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r2-9 (i686) * tp_smapi-0.41-70 (i686) * vhba-module-20140928-14 (i686) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.28-3 (i686) * acpi_call-1.1.0-31 (x86_64) * bbswitch-0.8-33 (x86_64) * r8168-8.040.00-3 (x86_64) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r2-9 (x86_64) * tp_smapi-0.41-70 (x86_64) * vhba-module-20140928-14 (x86_64) * virtualbox-modules-4.3.28-3 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (17 total) == * acpi_call-1.1.0-31 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-33 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.040.00-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r2-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-70 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20140928-14 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.28-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * acpi_call-1.1.0-31 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * bbswitch-0.8-33 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.040.00-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1_r2-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-70 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20140928-14 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.3.28-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wireshark-1.12.6-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. foutrelis - 2 signoffs 2. bisson - 2 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 04 Jul '15

04 Jul '15

=== 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 * 3 packages missing signoffs * 0 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] (3 total) == * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wireshark-1.12.6-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. anatolik - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 03 Jul '15

03 Jul '15

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 1 new package in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 3 packages missing signoffs * 0 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 (1 total) == * wireshark-1.12.6-1 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (3 total) == * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * wireshark-1.12.6-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Cannot log in to AUR, probably due to forgotten username
by Roey Darwish Dror 02 Jul '15

02 Jul '15

Although I just reset my password in AUR I still cannot log in using the new password. IIRC my username is r-darwish, but I might have forgotten it.

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 02 Jul '15

02 Jul '15

=== 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 * 0 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) == * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. eworm - 2 signoffs 2. bisson - 2 signoffs 3. foutrelis - 1 signoffs 4. anatolik - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 01 Jul '15

01 Jul '15

=== 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 * 0 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) == * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. foutrelis - 2 signoffs 2. bisson - 2 signoffs 3. eworm - 1 signoffs 4. lcarlier - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Thinking about repackaging... Should I?
by Giovanni Santini 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

Hello everybody, I'm actually the maintainer of the gcc44-multilib package, that can be found here: https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/gcc44-multilib/ After taking a look at the gcc49-multilib package, I had thoughts about rewriting the PKGBUILD or not. How could I choose about this? I just want to know what do you think about this specific package, but also in general (if in the future I'll have the same problem, what should I do?). -- Giovanni Santini My blog: http://giovannisantini.tk My code: https://github.com/ItachiSan My GPG: 2FADEBF5

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 30 Jun '15

30 Jun '15

=== 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 * 0 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) == * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * lightdm-1:1.14.0-4 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0