- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

Re: [aur-general] [aur-dev] Drop packages
by Ike Devolder 16 May '12

16 May '12

Op woensdag 16 mei 2012 18:29:16 schreef Petronio Padilha: > Hello there!! > > On the 15th and 16th May I did upload three packages: archscript, > archsysinfo, and finally archsysinfo-git (the ok-version!). > > So,let's start from the beginning... > > First... i did upload my source named: *archscript*. After I upload, > someone told me I could not leave the package without "-git" in its name > and that there is also a script called archscript. So I decided to change > the package name, but I made a mistake again... > I identified a little problem with PKGBUILD and with the git code. > So finally I uploaded the final version archsysinfo-git. > > I would like to stay with *archsysinfo-git *and remove *archscript *and * > archsysinfo* > > Sorry for the confusion. Deleted the wrong ones for aur packages please send your mails to aur-general mailinglist and not to aur-dev and could you also provide links to the packages in the future thx --Ike

2 1

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

16 May '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 * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 3 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] (1 total) == * systemd-arch-units-20120412-5 (any) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (2 total) == * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (x86_64), since 2012-04-26 * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (i686), since 2012-04-26 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. allan - 1 signoffs 2. ibiru - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] (no subject)
by Jagmjp Janpgm 15 May '12

15 May '12

<p>Make a lot of money working from home<br><a href="http://facemash.fa.funpic.de/lastnews/16AndrewCooper/">http://facemash.fa.funpic.de/lastnews/16AndrewCooper/</a></p>

3 2

[aur-general] Deletion request: libsbml42-layout-render
by Michael Schubert 15 May '12

15 May '12

Hello, please delete libsbml42-layout-render [1], as the extension has become available for libSBML 5 (I am the maintainer). Thanks Michael [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=53163

2 1

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

15 May '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 * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 3 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] (1 total) == * systemd-arch-units-20120412-5 (any) 0/2 signoffs == Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (2 total) == * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (i686) 1/2 signoffs * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (x86_64) 1/2 signoffs == All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (2 total) == * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (x86_64), since 2012-04-26 * mariadb-5.5.23-3 (i686), since 2012-04-26 == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours == 1. tomegun - 5 signoffs 2. eric - 4 signoffs 3. pierre - 1 signoffs

1 0

[aur-general] Catalyst/Nvidia cleanup
by Jesse Juhani Jaara 15 May '12

15 May '12

#Please remove the following out-of-date/old versions of catalyst #packages. None of them probably builds with the current stock kernels, #and mostlikely need really old version of X.org [1]catalyst-beta [2]catalyst-ice [3]catalyst-leaked [4]catalyst-old [5]catalyst-switch [6]catalyst-tp [7]catalyst-utils-old --------------------------------------------------------------------- [1]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31216 [2]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=15482 [3]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=28842 [4]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25105 [5]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48208 [6]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=16406 [7]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25106 ===================================================================== #The following nvdia binary blob releated packages should be removed. #Reasons include orphan, out-of-date, old (beta/testing) versions, which #do not work with our current kernels, X.org or need some older gcc #release. [10]cuda-beta [11]cuda-sdk-beta [12]cuda-toolkit-beta [13]cuda-old [14]cuda-sdk-old [15]cuda-toolkit-old ##If needed the -old packages should be reuploaded as cuda2-X like done ##with most other applications and as with the verison 3 branch of #cuda(cuda3-X) [16]cuda-sdk-gcc34 #Do we really need a version for gcc34? --------------------------------------------------------------------- [10]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48012 [11]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47707 [12]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47706 [13]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30504 [14]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30506 [15]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30505 [16]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=26331 ===================================================================== [20]nvidia-96xx-fbcondecor [21]nvidia-96xx-ice [22]nvidia-96xx-zen #No maintainer and depend on the old kernel26 naming scheme, #nvidia-96xx-all can build a package for any installed kernel. Merging #to nvidia-96xx-all, instead of removal, might be the way to go. [23]lib32-nvidia-utils-96xx --------------------------------------------------------------------- [20]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25475 [21]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=15440 [22]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=13901 [23]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32046 ===================================================================== [30]nvidia-173xx-ck [31]nvidia-173xx-fbcondecor [32]nvidia-173xx-ice [33]nvidia-173xx-lqx [34]nvidia-173xx-lts #Merge into [35]nvidia-173xx-all, same reason as with the 96xx branch. #nvidia-173xx-all, is out-of-date but maintained unlike the others. --------------------------------------------------------------------- [30]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=44381 [31]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31986 [32]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=21059 [33]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=46877 [34]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=46112 [35]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32909 ===================================================================== [40]nvidia-256 [41]nvidia-ck-256 [42]nvidia-utils-256 [43]lib32-nvidia-utils-256 #If I undertood correctly from my googling, this is not an major version #branch, which dropped support for old hw. At the moment of writing #binary repo nvidia, has all of the same functionality + more -------------------------------------------------------------------- [40]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42037 [41]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43968 [42]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42038 [43]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43969 ===================================================================== [50]nvidia-275xx [51]nvidia-275xx-ck [52]nvidia-utils-275xx [53]lib32-nvidia-utils-275xx [54]opencl-nvidia-275xx #If I understood correctly my googling, this is older version of the one #in binary repos (at the moment of writing), with the exeption of this #being for X.org server 1.11. --------------------------------------------------------------------- [50]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=52283 [51]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=55013 [52]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=52285 [53]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=52284 [54]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=52286 ===================================================================== [60]nforce-nvsound [61]nforce-nvsound-utils #Some really old OSS sound driver for nForce 1/2 motherboards, support #for them exist in kernel tree, accoeding to comments. [62]nvidia-builder #Out-of-date, non maintained, we can easily manage without it too. Easy #to remake if ever needed [63]rivatv-cvs #Old kernel triver, last commit 4 years ago, I'd be suprised if it would #build with modern kernel, without 5000 lines of patches ^_^ --------------------------------------------------------------------- [60]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=6922 [61]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=6923 [62]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31604 [63]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=9500 ===================================================================== [70]nvidia-beta-zen: badly out-of-date, no maintainer [71]nvidia-ice-beta: -||- [72]nvidia-tp: -||- [73]nvidia-utils-glselect: -||- [74]nvidia-utils-ice: -||- [75]nvidia-utils-pselec: -||- [76]nvidia-utils-sane: -||- [77]nvidia-vs: -||- [78]nvidia-xen #out-of-date, no maintainer, does not build for xen kernel, but instead #the one which one booted in. `uname -r` [79]nvidia-yi: badly out-of-date, no maintainer. [80]nvidia-zen-stable --------------------------------------------------------------------- [70]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=13904 [71]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=20410 [72]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14974 [73]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35814 [74]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50024 [75]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35824 [76]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29617 [77]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45327 [78]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=13093 [79]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37948 [80]https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30154

2 1

[aur-general] remove package
by Tai-Lin Chu 14 May '12

14 May '12

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=57916 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=56186 Thanks.

2 1

[aur-general] removal request
by Guardiano 14 May '12

14 May '12

Hello, i uploaded PKGBUILD with wrong name, please delete this. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=59283 Thanks! Guardiano

2 1

Re: [aur-general] Multilib package [skype] marked out-of-date
by Florian Pritz 14 May '12

14 May '12

On 14.05.2012 15:22, Arch Website Notification wrote: > **** wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: > > > * skype 2.2.0.35-3 [community] (i686): https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/i686/skype/ > * skype 2.2.0.35-3 [multilib] (x86_64): https://www.archlinux.org/packages/multilib/x86_64/skype/ > > > The user provided the following additional text: > > New Version available http://blogs.skype.com/garage/2012/05/skype_22_for_linux_hotfix.html > > http://download.skype.com/linux/skype_static-2.2.0.99.tar.bz2 > > Maybe 2.2.0.35-3 is not affected, but even then, its not the latest version. Please update :-)! We are packaging the dynamically linked skype binary and if you read that blog post skype even states that you don't need to update that because .35 is the latest dynamically linked skype package. The problem that has been fix in the static build is in libpng which we package separately and that has already been updated, therefore our skype package is fine. Since this is the second time, I ask everyone not to flag skype out of date again unless they really release a new dynamically linked package. Thank you. PS: The submitter of this OOD message has been BCC'ed. -- Florian Pritz

1 0

[aur-general] [uTorrent-server] need help with PKGBUILD!
by Pierre-Antoine Vanpe 14 May '12

14 May '12

Hi all, I own the uTorrent-serveur package [1] lots of people asked me to run the utserver deamon as utserver instead of root, so I tried my best with another member, but we can't get it to work right. It works but only after installing it, after a reboot it won't work without any errors. Only way to make it work again is re-installing. Can anyone help me with this PKGBUILD? [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43253 BTW, there are a few duplicates PKGBUILDs for utorrent-server....

2 2