Search results for "Deletion request for pkgbase" - Aur-requests

Re: [PRQ#73348] Deletion Request for zoom-firejail

by Xiao Pan

On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 06:58:57AM +0000, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > oech3 [1] filed a deletion request for zoom-firejail [2]: > > This just runs zoom on firejail. > > But it seems user-side workaround is also needed according to > maintainer of this :https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/zoom- > firejail#comment-978751 . > > If it is impossible to add package itself, this should be move to Arch > wiki. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/oech3/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/zoom-firejail/ Firejail 0.9.74 is released and it contains the fix, no workaround is needed any more. I have tested it on my Nvidia GPU. Please read [1] carefully, I mentioned there was a pull request [2] fixed the issue and I also wrote "wait until new firejail version 0.9.74", the meaning of this is firejail version 0.9.74 contains the fix so no workaround is needed if you are using firejail version 0.9.74. Arch Linux already has official firejail version 0.9.74 package since 2025-03-25 see [3]. I repeat again, no user-side workaround is needed for aur/zoom-firejail to work now because official Arch firejail version 0.9.74 package contains the fix for the issue in pull request [2]. Please do not delete zoom-firejail package from AUR. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/zoom-firejail#comment-978751 [2] https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/pull/6387 [3] https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/firejail/

3 months

Re: [PRQ#51287] Deletion Request for ut2004-gog

by John-Michael Mulesa

Since my first reply may have been blocked: Maintainer here. A game's delisting from GOG doesn't magically remove it from everyone's libraries that have purchased it prior to the delisting or the content from GOG's servers. Hence why this package should remain available for those of us that purchased the game in the past. In this case ut2004 remains playable and usable for those who already own it. Thanks, JM On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:05 AM sL1pKn07 SpinFlo <sl1pkn07(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, in the first OP statement, say if you have purchase the game, you can > still download and play the game, so i think delete this package is not a > good idea > > or you can't access anymore to the game but stay in the library > unplayable?. if is afirmative, go > > greetings > > El mié, 15 nov 2023 a las 16:06, <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> escribió: > >> Alad [1] filed a deletion request for ut2004-gog [2]: >> >> Removed from GOG >> >> https://www.gog.com/forum/general/delisting_unreal_games_unreal_tournament_… >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Alad/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/ut2004-gog/ > >

1 year, 9 months

[PRQ#51875] Deletion Request for kcm-wacomtablet-git

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for kcm-wacomtablet-git [2]: Please delete this. Not just because it has been broken for years, but also because Arch KDE-Unstable now has the stable package under a different name: wacomtablet [a], which corresponds to upstream's name [b]. Not useful to keep a VCS package whose name now mandates it to be built for Plasma 5. Because the latter is in deep maintenance mode and will soon become EOL. Creating a new wacomtablet-git shouldn't be too hard, though it has a new dependency, libplasma, for which there is also no current git package on AUR. I myself don't want to create such packages, because I don't have the time to test them, and my hardware is also not quite up to speed for complex builds. People who want to test the upcoming Plasma 6, now in Beta release, can install packages for it from Arch/KDE-Unstable repo. Or someone can grab PKGBUILDs from that repo and turn them into git builds and upload them to AUR. It is the most useful course of action to delete this one meanwhile. [a]: https://archlinux.org/packages/kde-unstable/x86_64/wacomtablet/ [b]: https://invent.kde.org/plasma/wacomtablet [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/kcm-wacomtablet-git/

1 year, 8 months

回复: [PRQ#66288] Deletion Request for wps-office-bin

by 1426669661

I am yifwon, the maintainer of wps-office-bin.I can not agree what you say and feel so annoyed about what you did, in the condition of kowning nothing in detail but with your arbitrary intuition. 1. this package source comes from https://linux.wps.cn，which is totally different from wps-office, whose url is http://wps-community.org. the source of 2 package is totally different. 2. wps-office-bin first pushed at 2019.4.5, wps-office at 2019.4.21. my package is not a duplicated one of wps-office, but also earlier than wps-office. 3. wps-office is a international package with all kinds of language mime, by kingsoft. but -bin is a Chinese customization one. 4.it is my package, you have your right to dislike it, but do not judge or delete others package. it is not your product and none of your business. MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for wps-office-bin [2]: Duplicate of AUR/wps-office. [a] Upstream is closed-source, so the '-bin' pkgname suffix is superfluous. Also please don't create duplicates of already existing packages. Communicate with the maintainer(s) of the existing one. [a]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/wps-office [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/wps-office-bin/

9 months

Re: [PRQ#48376] Deletion Request for python2-bintrees

by sergej

Hi Marcell, understood. Thanks for shedding some light on the process. > But - TLDR - if you agree to the deletion, you can file a new deletion request as maintainer (and in that case, keep ownership of the package). Done. Best regards, Sergej On 10/7/23 17:05, Marcell Meszaros wrote: > Hi Sergej, > > Thank you for your response. > > On AUR, package owners cannot effect technical acceptance or rejection of submitted requests. > > But - TLDR - if you agree to the deletion, you can file a new deletion request as maintainer (and in that case, keep ownership of the package). > > Maintainers' requests can get priority treatment by Trusted Users. They can list such as a separate category on AURweb. It is helpful for them, as those submissions bear stronger credence as to the validity and reasonability of the proposed action. > > Regular requests submitted by people other the maintainer typically have much longer waiting time before they get acted upon. (Currently around 2.5 month.) > > Cheers, > Marcell (MarsSeed) > > On 7 October 2023 10:39:28 GMT+02:00, sergej <sergej(a)msgpeek.net> wrote: >> On 10/3/23 14:58, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >>> MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for python2-bintrees [2]: >>> >>> This Python2 library is not used by any other pkg, so I propose >>> deletion. >>> >>> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >>> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/python2-bintrees/ >> Hi all, >> >> pkg maintainer here. If this helps to speed up the process: I agree with the deletion request and the reasoning behind it. >> >> I'd rather see it deleted rather than orphaned. But I can also just disown it. Is there a proper process to follow in this case? [0] doesn't explicitly mention if and how pkg owner should react. >> >> Best regards, >> Sergej >> >> >> [0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Deletion >>

1 year, 10 months

Re: [PRQ#45699] Merge Request for archey3-git

by Gaspard d'Hautefeuille

Arguments against the merge request: 1) archey3 is on the wiki <https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Archey3>, not archey4 2) archey3 is maintained in the [extra] repo <https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/any/archey3/>, not archey4 3) archey3-git is maintained on the AUR <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/archey3-git>, there is no such thing as archey4-git 4) archey3-git is up-to-date with the upstream repo <https://github.com/lclarkmichalek/archey3> 5) archey3-git has 171 votes, archey4 has 16 votes 6) archey3 and archey4 are forks from different authors, so votes & comments should not be merged (stolen) into a whole different package Argument for deletion: 1) The archey3 author has said he will archive his repo and will no longer maintain archey3 <https://github.com/lclarkmichalek/archey3/issues/52#issuecomment-1663777320> Arguments against deletion: 1) I contacted the TU Alexander Rødseth that maintains the [extra] archey3 package, he would need to consider maintaining archey4 in [extra] rather than archey3 before we consider for deletion archey3-git 2) When the TU does that, I would need to start maintaining archey4-git, before I submit for deletion archey3-git Sincerely, HLFH > On 1 Aug 2023, at 17:26, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > > MarsSeed [1] filed a request to merge archey3-git [2] into archey4 > [3]: > > As discussed with maintainer @HLFH in comments 10+ months ago, this > application has been superseded by continuation fork archey4. He > posted a link to the new AUR package then, so users should be well- > informed at this point. > > Archey3 has not been developed since 2018. [a] > > Arch repo still carries the last archey3 (however, devs would be > advised to consider adopting archey4 to [extra]). > > Though archey3-git is a VCS package and AUR/archey4 is not, there's no > VCS package for the latter but it would still be good to migrate the > high number of votes and comments to the successor application's > package rather than just deleting them. > > AUR/archey3-git is defunct so there's no harm in removing that in > favor of archey4. > > [a]: https://github.com/lclarkmichalek/archey3/commits/master > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/archey3-git/ > [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/archey4/

2 years

Re: [PRQ#46847] Deletion Request for autopanovideo-beta

by Emeric Grange

Le mer. 30 août 2023 à 10:39, <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> a écrit : > dreieck [1] filed a deletion request for autopanovideo-beta [2]: > > This should be deleted, since version 3.0.0 is now stable and package > `autopanovideopro` needs the appropriate update, which makes > `autopanovideo-beta` a duplicate: > > https://download.kolor.com/avp/stable/history > https://download.kolor.com/avp/stable/linux64tarxz/3.0.0.400 > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/dreieck/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/autopanovideo-beta/ Hi, The problem is that autopano video 3 got released shortly before the company got canned by its overlords, was rushed and never got a single bugfix. It wasn't even considered stable by its developers. Also it requires a new product key IIRC. It has legitimate improvements, especially stitching quality, and related to performance (but these are not in the linux version anyway...) but use it at your own risks. So it is why the beta package is AVP 3 and the regular package is AVP 2, and it really should stay that way. Renaming autopanovideopro into autopanovideo2 and autopanovideo-beta into autopanovideo3 would be a better solution I think, but it is debatable if it has any relevance to do so after so long. Emeric

1 year, 11 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#7406] Deletion Request for dash-sh

by Kieran Colford

Please accept this deletion request as the owner deems it no longer necessary at all. On Thu, Feb 2, 2017, 7:55 AM Kieran Colford, <kieran(a)kcolford.com> wrote: > Ah, I see, could you include this into the wiki article on dash? This is a > much cleaner solution than modifying pacman.conf like it suggests. > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017, 1:39 AM Eli Schwartz, <eschwartz93(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On 02/02/2017 01:32 AM, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > > Eschwartz [1] filed a deletion request for dash-sh [2]: > > > > Frivolous duplicate of extra/dash with sh symlinked to dash instead of > > bash. > > > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Eschwartz/ > > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/dash-sh/ > > Note that a better way of doing this is through pacman hooks: > > ``` > [eschwartz@arch /tmp/bash-nosh]$ cat /etc/pacman.d/hooks/sh-is-dash.hook > [Trigger] > Type = Package > Operation = Install > Operation = Upgrade > Target = bash > > [Action] > Description = Re-pointing /bin/sh symlink to dash... > When = PostTransaction > Exec = /usr/bin/ln -sf dash /usr/bin/sh > Depends = dash > ``` > > This allows me to use the repo packages, rather than maintaining forked > copies, and at the same time ensures sh will always use dash, assuming > dash is available. > > -- > Eli Schwartz > > -- > > Signed, Kieran Colford > -- Signed, Kieran Colford

8 years, 6 months

Re: [PRQ#43769] Deletion Request for python2-rsgislib

by Danilo J. S. Bellini

Agreed for deletion, it's irreparably broken, I would need to create from scratch a new GDAL legacy package to be able to run in parallel with the current version, and that would easily go down the rabbit hole of unmatched dependencies. My last attempts to force Python 2 in recent GDAL gave me too many segfaults to be useful. Since this is a dependency for python2-arcsi, the same should be said about that package. I'm going to disown these two now. On Thu, 6 Jul 2023 at 13:20, <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> wrote: > MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for python2-rsgislib [2]: > > Quite irreparably broken, deprecated Python2 library. > > Last updated in 2018; source is now 404. > Missing the undeclared boost-python2 and python2-gdal dependencies. > > Its core binary dependency GDAL no longer supports Python2 bindings. > And for the old Python2 bindings in AUR, there is no matching GDAL > build. > > I recommend deleting this defunct package. > > Finally it seems the Python3 version of the arcsi toolkit and its > Python dependencies, available on AUR, have caught up with each other > and with the current version of gdal in repo. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/python2-rsgislib/ -- Danilo J. S. Bellini

2 years, 1 month

[PRQ#49681] Deletion Request for kf5-kio-ftps

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for kf5-kio-ftps [2]: Defunct KDE4 KIO Slave addon from 2008, barely ported in 2015 to KDE5, with KdeLibs4Support still needed. And it already doesn't work. When trying to access an FTPS server dir, it quits, and says: "TLS Negotiation failed on the data channel." It is supposed to work in PASV mode, but it seems not to be the case. Even KIO5 itself complains that this module is broken, see log output: "kf.kio.core: error() called twice! Please fix the kio_ftps KIO worker." Also, even if it worked, it would be insecure. It doesn't support TLS certificate validation, it just blindly accepts the TLS connection without bothering with certificates, even if the server presents an unknown, untrusted certificate. And also as it depends on kdelibs4support, which is EOL and likely won't work on KDE Plasma 6, this won't even be able to run in a few months. I don't think it's useful to keep this any longer. People who need proper FTPS (FTP with TLS) support should use a reliable, working application offering this functionality. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/kf5-kio-ftps/

1 year, 9 months

Aur-requests search results for query "Deletion request for pkgbase"