- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Deletion request
by rafael ff1 16 Jun '12

16 Jun '12

ristretto-mod [1] provides a feature that was added to Ristretto a loooong time ago. Even the maintainer abandoned it. So, please delete. [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25985

2 1

[aur-general] (no subject)
by Jagmjp Janpgm 16 Jun '12

16 Jun '12

<p><a href="http://dallidata.da.funpic.de/bravebay/Darren_Wood95/">http://dallidata.da.funpic.de/bravebay/Darren_Wood95/</a></p>

2 1

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 16 Jun '12

16 Jun '12

=== 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 * 4 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 2 packages missing signoffs * 4 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) == * nginx-1.2.1-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * nginx-1.2.1-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (4 total) == * conntrack-tools-1.2.0-1 (i686), since 2012-05-27 * conntrack-tools-1.2.0-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-27 * libnetfilter_cttimeout-1.0.0-2 (i686), since 2012-05-27 * libnetfilter_cttimeout-1.0.0-2 (x86_64), since 2012-05-27 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. thomas - 3 signoffs 2. eric - 3 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] delete lejos_nxj; replaced by lejos-nxj
by Zack Buhman 16 Jun '12

16 Jun '12

Hello. I am the current maintainer for both lejos_nxj and lejos-nxj. lejos_nxj had been outdated (and poorly written) for some time, and when I got ownership of it, I thought it was probably a good time to simultaneously upload an updated version, and fix the ugly underscore name scheme used by the original author of lejos_nxj. I would like very much if lejos_nxj could be deleted. Thank you.

2 1

[aur-general] ChangeLog vs .ChangeLog
by Mateusz Loskot 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

Hi, The Creating packages wiki [1] is quite clear about what packages should contain. I cloned the Git repo of AUR to look into various existing packages, compare details, and learn by example. Apart from the mandatory .PKGINFO file, some packages contain the optional .INSTALL too. But, there is no package that contains the optional .ChangeLog file. Instead, there are packages that contain ChangeLog file (without dot). I looked into some of the files and they seem to be maintainers' ChangeLog, not original ChangeLog of software project. My question is, if they are indeed maintainers' logs, why nobody bothers naming them .ChangeLog? Is the wiki out of date here, or the policy is relaxed? [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Creating_Packages [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository#Git_Repo Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

4 6

[aur-general] Package removal
by Maxime Gauduin 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

Hi guys, Could you remove this package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=55226 ? Made it because of the version requirement in scilab, but it won't compile against some other arch packages, so people are better off using scilab-bin. Thx in advance. -- Alucryd

2 1

[aur-general] Sign offs for community-testing
by Lone_Wolf 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

Greetings, With the latest kernel update to 3.4.2 i got a message from pacman that vhba-module needed kernle < 3.4 (vhba module is needed for cdemu ). I installed vhba-module from community-testing which is build for 3.4 kernel and have encountered no problems. How can users/non-developers help with sign offs for community-testing ?

1 0

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

=== 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 * 4 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 8 packages missing signoffs * 10 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] (8 total) == * ndiswrapper-1.57-12 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * nginx-1.2.1-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20120422-1 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.1.16-2 (i686) 0/2 signoffs * ndiswrapper-1.57-12 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * nginx-1.2.1-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20120422-1 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.1.16-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (10 total) == * virtualbox-modules-4.1.16-2 (i686), since 2012-05-22 * virtualbox-modules-4.1.16-2 (x86_64), since 2012-05-22 * vhba-module-20120422-1 (i686), since 2012-05-23 * vhba-module-20120422-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-23 * ndiswrapper-1.57-12 (x86_64), since 2012-05-23 * ndiswrapper-1.57-12 (i686), since 2012-05-23 * conntrack-tools-1.2.0-1 (i686), since 2012-05-27 * conntrack-tools-1.2.0-1 (x86_64), since 2012-05-27 * libnetfilter_cttimeout-1.0.0-2 (i686), since 2012-05-27 * libnetfilter_cttimeout-1.0.0-2 (x86_64), since 2012-05-27 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. tpowa - 3 signoffs 2. foutrelis - 1 signoffs 3. bluewind - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Removal request: dosemu-svn
by Mike Swanson 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=51941 subversion repository is deprecated and dosemu-git is the new package.

2 1

[aur-general] Structure and naming of packages
by Mateusz Loskot 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

Hi, (I'm not sure if this post belongs here or perhaps to aur-dev, sorry for confusion.) Is there any convention regarding structure and naming of packages? I have a project implemented in C, which consist of a library and collection of utilities. In Debian world, this project is split across three packages: abc0 - library abc-bin - utilities abc-devel - headers and files for developers I'd like to create a package for Arch. How should I structure? Also, I'd like to have two variants of packages: one for latest stable release and one for development upstream hosted in SVN. Shall I use -svn suffix for the latter? I have checked the Wiki of ABS, Package Development category, etc. and I haven't found answer to my questions. Any pointers? Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

2 2