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

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#36474] Deletion Request for powerpill

by Marcell Meszaros

Unless *all* IP's are blocked throughout the world from downloading the sources, this should not be deleted. Revenge is not a valid reason for dropping a package from AUR. On 18 July 2022 10:08:33 GMT+02:00, "Christopher Snowhill (kode54) via aur-requests" <aur-requests(a)lists.archlinux.org> wrote: > >> On Jul 18, 2022, at 12:26 AM, notify--- via aur-requests <aur-requests(a)lists.archlinux.org> wrote: >> >> XeonDead [1] filed a deletion request for powerpill [2]: >> >> The author has disabled connections to his storage server based on >> GeoIP. Just so happens, I've been hit, so the package can't be built, >> or it's dependencies. >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/XeonDead/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/powerpill/ > >Sounds like the dev is one of those helpful people who think it's really "helpful" to geoblock Russia right now. That sort of "help" doesn't belong in the AUR, in my opinion.

3 years, 5 months

[PRQ#59581] Deletion Request for fofix

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for fofix [2]: Broken. Last updated in 2021; upstream's last tag was also in that year. Last AUR packager was upstream, but they have disowned it instead of fixing it. Not useful to keep, as it depends on python2-pygame, which is EOL since 2021 and fails to build on Arch Linux due to ABI incompatibility with current portaudio library. There is still an AUR/fofix-git package. It is too abandoned and currently similarly broken. But upstream master branch is still maintained and works with some version of Python 3. So it seems the git package is still viable to keep, awaiting a willing volunteer's contribution to update it to python3, whereas the stable package is defunct, as per upstream's abandonment of fixed version releases. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/fofix/

1 year, 7 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#18963] Deletion Request for dxvk-winelib

by Christopher Snowhill (kode54)

> On Apr 21, 2020, at 3:28 AM, Stelios Tsampas via aur-requests <aur-requests(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > > > On 4/21/20 11:53 AM, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >> soredake [1] filed a deletion request for dxvk-winelib [2]: >> >> https://github.com/doitsujin/dxvk/commit/436357e28096f5e1e25aa8b72fceb77123… >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/soredake/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/dxvk-winelib/ > The version pointed by the tag still builds correctly under wine. The commit you are pointing to > > is after the tag built by this package. And even so, since this package builds correctly for this version, > > what is the problem with it existing? Why should this be deleted? > Are you suggesting that this package maintain a fork of the library which still supports winelib builds? Or instead that it continue to exist to build and install this old commit which will quickly become obsolete as further improvements are added past this commit?

5 years, 8 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#13077] Deletion Request for archlinux-iso

by Ryan Petris

> Muflone [1] filed a deletion request for archlinux-iso [2]: > > This package doesn't offer any use. > It simply downloads the latest iso from a mirror and copy it > somewhere > in the system. > > [1] > https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Muflone/ > > [2] > https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/archlinux-iso/ (since these are similar, this is a copy/paste from a reply to the tails-iso deletion request) Before I created these I had looked for other examples. First there's a package in community for the virtualbox guest iso: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/any/virtualbox-guest-iso/ Additionally, despite the description, this package also just downloads and iso and installs it into a directory: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/grml-iso/ So I'd imagine that having an up-to-date iso in a known location would be useful to at least a few people other than myself, which meets the criteria of "usefulness" in the AUR guidelines: "If more than a few people would find this package useful, it is appropriate for submission." ( https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository#Rules_of_submissi… )

7 years, 1 month

[PRQ#48455] Deletion Request for avahi-git

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for avahi-git [2]: Abandoned, long-broken, unmaintained VCS package from 2020. (Still has dependency on Python2 modules.) It doesn't actually make sense to keep this in AUR, for the reason as follows. Upstream hasn't released any new versions since 2020, but there are regular maintenance and improvement commits on the git master branch. Because of that, Arch extra repo avahi package maintainers regularly update that PKGBUILD to catch up with the git master. Therefore the repo package is very much like a git build - one that gets refreshed with reasonable cadence. So even if this AUR package got a new maintainer who invested their time and effort to fixing it, most of the time the built package would contain exactly the same code as repo's avahi. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/avahi-git/

2 years, 2 months

[PRQ#70541] Deletion Request for dnssec-trigger

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

Freso [1] filed a deletion request for dnssec-trigger [2]: Quoting comment from 2022: > This does not work for me at all. Also, when uninstalling the package, the > immutable attribute remains applied to /etc/resolv.conf (can be removed with > sudo chattr -i /etc/resolv.conf). Moreover, comparing the PKGBUILD with the > INSTALL file in the source, seems that some needed steps are missing > (dnssec-trigger-control-setup and dnssec-trigger-control-setup -i). I would > suggest against installing this package (or maybe even remove it from AUR), > as it could leave your system in a broken state. Some 2019 comments also suggest that the package might not be working. The package was last updated in 2018. Upstream also seems fairly dry, even if not entirely dead (yet): https://github.com/NLnetLabs/dnssec-trigger/commits/master/ [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Freso/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/dnssec-trigger/

9 months, 2 weeks

[PRQ#74912] Deletion Request for kumono

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

AlphaLynx [1] filed a deletion request for kumono [2]: The sole purpose of this package is illegal piracy. This package is a downloader for content from coomer.st and kemono.cr, sites that host NSFW paid content from onlyfans, fansly, patreon, etc. (see r/piracy [0] & [1]) I'm not sure whether this is allowed because the AUR submission guidelines don't explicitly say illegal or piracy packages should not be uploaded. But, the code of conduct [2] prohibits "criminal solicitation" and numerous piracy packages have been deleted previously (e.g., PRQ#65330, PRQ#74391, PRQ#25316). So, given that, I think these packages should be deleted. The guidelines should probably be more explicit in prohibiting illegal/piracy packages. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/Piracy/comments/15v3szz/coomerparty_downloader/ [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Piracy/comments/10pu5dk/is_there_a_site_like_kemon… [2] https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#criminal- solicitation [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/AlphaLynx/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/kumono/

4 months, 3 weeks

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#27379] Deletion Request for linux-enable-ir-emitter-git

by Fabio Loli

Il 03/08/21 15:00, notify--- via aur-requests ha scritto: > EmixamPP [1] filed a deletion request for linux-enable-ir-emitter-git > [2]: > > Hello, > I am the creator of the software used by this package. > However, it is no longer up to date at all and I maintain the > following package with the help of other people via my GitHub : > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/linux-enable-ir-emitter/ > This package is therefore an out-of-date duplicate and the maintainer > never announced himself on the git project. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/EmixamPP/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/linux-enable-ir-emitter-git/ > VCS pkgbuilds are by definition never outdated (unless there are issues), so far there hasn't been a single fixed release of linux-enable-ir-emitter, and even then it is not valid reason to delete linux-enable-ir-emitter-git which can continue to exist

4 years, 4 months

Re: [PRQ#49369] Deletion Request for mpv-caca

by Marcell Meszaros

On 21 October 2023 13:27:48 GMT+02:00, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for mpv-caca [2]: > >I don't think it's useful to keep this legacy mpv version. Upstream >dropped libcaca support, so this cannot be updated to newer version, >unlike extra repo's mpv. > >This also depends on the broken, unbuildable ffmpeg5.1, not required >by any other package. > >mpv alternatives mplayer and vlc still support libcaca, if someone >really wants to use that output library. > >[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/mpv-caca/ I have fixed ffmpeg5.1, but this package is still broken, and seems not needed by anyone. The working AUR/mpv-full provides libcaca support, I've pointed this out in a comment in order to make users aware of this.

1 year, 9 months

Re: [PRQ#60968] Deletion Request for gnome-papers-git

by intelfx＠intelfx.name

On 2024-06-15 at 23:46 +0000, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > yochananmarqos [1] filed a deletion request for gnome-papers-git [2]: > > We already have 'papers' in the AUR, so this should have been called > 'papers-git'. Papers is meant to be an eventual replacement for > Evince. It's not called gnome-evince, is it? > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/yochananmarqos/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/gnome-papers-git/ Well, I'm obviously active on AUR, so perhaps you could try to contact me prior to filing the deletion request? Also you could do away with a little less snark in the text of your request, especially given that GNOME apps with generic names (Software[1], Notes[2], Maps[3], ...) packaged for Arch generally *are* prefixed with "gnome-". That said, I actually did not notice there was "papers" in the AUR already, so I guess there can be made an argument for consistency. -- Ivan Shapovalov / intelfx / [1]: https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/gnome-software/ [2]: https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/gnome-notes/ [3]: https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/gnome-maps/

1 year, 6 months

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