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

Re: [PRQ#43382] Deletion Request for openblas-lapack

by Guillaume Horel

This is not exactly the same package. The package in community provides the dynamic arch version, whereas this one will be specifically tuned for your current architecture. I've responded in the comments that there is nothing broken at the moment with this package, and I don't see the need to delete it. On Sun, Jul 2, 2023 at 7:17 AM <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> wrote: > MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for openblas-lapack [2]: > > Same package is now in [extra], named blas-openblas: > > https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/blas-openblas/ > > See announcement about it: > https://archlinux.org/news/openblas-0323-2-update-requires-manual- > intervention/ > <https://archlinux.org/news/openblas-0323-2-update-requires-manual-intervent…> > > I have notified AUR maintainers in comments about their need to review > this change, and possibly adapt their PKGBUILD's. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/openblas-lapack/

2 years, 5 months

[PRQ#45349] Deletion Request for nsfminer-git

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for nsfminer-git [2]: Orphan package, last updated a year ago. Seems like a personal hard fork of ethminer, which has been discontinued since Apr 2022, and its repo is now archived. [a] Whereas this tool's repo is not read-only, but development stopped in Oct 2021, 6 months before upstream became dead. [b] On Sep 15, 2022, the original Ethereum was replaced by the incompatible Ethereum 2, which no longer requires coin mining because it is based on proof-of-stake, not proof-of-work like Ethereum 1. [c] Therefore old Ethereum tools like this one are no longer viable with the current mainstream version. (There is another community hard fork of ethminer called etcminer, which is still maintained. [d]) [a]: https://github.com/ethereum-mining/ethminer [b]: https://github.com/Titaniumtown/nsfminer [c]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum [d]: https://github.com/colin-i/etcminer [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/nsfminer-git/

2 years, 4 months

Re: [PRQ#48572] Deletion Request for sfml25

by Marcell Meszaros

Submitter disowned it after my deletion request. Nothing depends specifically on this conflicting package on AUR., On 8 October 2023 23:22:09 GMT+02:00, Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros(a)runbox.eu> wrote: >Minor correction: I wanted to say this is a *newly uploaded* pkg. > >On 8 October 2023 20:48:19 GMT+02:00, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >>MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for sfml25 [2]: >> >>Newly updated pkg, for an older version of repo's sfml, and it >>conflicts with that. This kind of package is explicitly not allowed in >>AUR submission guidelines. >> >>Also, the pkgname is noconformant with general Arch package guidelines >>as well: attached number should be for major version, but this package >>builds v2.5, not v25. >> >>If needed, please make a non-conflicting package and re-upload as >>'sfml-2.5'. >> >>Also such package should not mention 'sfml' in its provides field, as >>it is not a drop-in replacement of repo's sfml v2.6.0. >> >>[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >>[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/sfml25/

2 years, 1 month

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#5124] Deletion Request for atom-editor

by Frederik “Freso” S. Olesen

Den 02-04-2016 kl. 10:28 skrev Doug Newgard: > On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 07:55:20 +0000 (UTC) > notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > >> Freso [1] filed a deletion request for atom-editor [2]: >> >> PKGBUILD creates files in $HOME. Request as per discussion in >> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur- >> general/2016-March/032195.html thread. >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Freso/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/atom-editor/ > > 1) No, it does not. But it does. Before makepkg'ing package: freso@koume> ls -Ald $HOME/.atom* drwxr-xr-x 8 freso freso 4096 2 apr 09:56 /home/freso/.atom.bak After makepkg'ing package: freso@koume> ls -Ald $HOME/.atom* drwxr-xr-x 6 freso freso 4096 2 apr 11:42 /home/freso/.atom drwxr-xr-x 8 freso freso 4096 2 apr 09:56 /home/freso/.atom.bak > 2) You requested deletion without contacting the maintainer? WTF? There is a comment from September last year about this. Several updates has been made to the package since. It still touches files in $HOME. -- Namasté, Frederik “Freso” S. Olesen <https://freso.dk/> AUR: https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Freso Wiki: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/User:Freso

9 years, 8 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#1152] Deletion Request for oraclejdk7-64

by spam＠nowaker.net

> It's the wrong approach (the default environment is handled by "archlinux-java"). archlinux-java is a tool to set a default Java, exactly right! And it's usable only in interactive shells or in environments where one wants one particular version of Java to run all applications. conf.d are usable when running system services that want a specific version of Java to be used without hardcoding full paths. Or just for sourcing from these env vars in scripts. > The only "server-only" versions provided by Oracle are for JRE: JDK is needed on build servers. JRE is not enough. -- Kind regards Damian Nowak -----Original Message----- From: notify(a)aur.archlinux.org To: aur-requests(a)archlinux.org Cc: nimetonmaili(a)gmail.com, spam(a)nowaker.net Sent: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 7:44 Subject: [PRQ#1152] Deletion Request for oraclejdk7-64 Det [1] filed a deletion request for oraclejdk7-64 [2]: Duplicate of jdk7, and doesn't follow the Java package guidelines (install directory, $JAVA_HOME, naming, etc.). Meant for "servers", but only distinct difference is not having "libxrender" or "hicolor-icon-theme" as dependencies. The only exclusively server version is for JRE (JDK has it all): http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/server-jre8-downloa… [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Det/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/oraclejdk7-64/

11 years, 2 months

Re: [PRQ#44418] Deletion Request for openspace

by Yuriy Ivanov

I made a mistake in creating this package. This can only be built from GIT.There's no "no git version": https://github.com/OpenSpace/OpenSpace/wiki/Compiling-Ubuntu-Linux There > 10 repositories that need to be connected with submodules. 13.07.2023 17:37, Marcell Meszaros пишет: >> this one is no longer required > That is not true. The project just released a new stable tagged release 2 weeks ago. So this package needs an update, that's all. > > A rolling -git package is not the equivalent of a stable one; not all users want to rebuild after every single commit. > > On 13 July 2023 16:14:48 GMT+02:00,notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote: >> Mr.Smith1974 [1] filed a deletion request for openspace [2]: >> >> The project has a git version and this one is no longer required. >> >> [1]https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Mr.Smith1974/ >> [2]https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/openspace/

2 years, 5 months

Re: [PRQ#48482] Deletion Request for tinyssh-convert-git

by Anton Semjonov

Not sure if I can just reply to this Email but .. sure, as the author of that tool I don't object. My other package tinyssh-keyconvert, which is a Python reimplementation [0], should probably be deleted along with it though. It seems that Jan Mojžíš took some inspiration from that and wrote their own little script [1] anyway. Since that's in upstream tinyssh, no extra tool is needed anymore, I think. Maybe Giancarlo can weigh in on whether this tool is still used in any of the mkinitcpio packages? [0] https://github.com/ansemjo/tinyssh-keyconvert/ [1] https://github.com/janmojzis/tinyssh/blob/master/tools/tinyssh-convert On 06/10/2023 16:23, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for tinyssh-convert-git [2]: > > Upstream GitHub repo discontinued and archived since 2019. [a] > > [a]: https://github.com/ansemjo/tinyssh-convert > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/tinyssh-convert-git/

2 years, 2 months

Re: [PRQ#43382] Deletion Request for openblas-lapack

by Guillaume Horel

This is not the exactly the same package. The package in community provides the dynamic arch version, whereas this one will be specifically tuned for your current architecture. I've responded in the comments that there is nothing broken at the moment with this package, and I don't see the need to delete it. On Sun, Jul 2, 2023 at 7:17 AM <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> wrote: > MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for openblas-lapack [2]: > > Same package is now in [extra], named blas-openblas: > > https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/blas-openblas/ > > See announcement about it: > https://archlinux.org/news/openblas-0323-2-update-requires-manual- > intervention/ > <https://archlinux.org/news/openblas-0323-2-update-requires-manual-intervent…> > > I have notified AUR maintainers in comments about their need to review > this change, and possibly adapt their PKGBUILD's. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/openblas-lapack/

2 years, 5 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#17737] Deletion Request for sway9

by Dan Elkouby

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 9:07 PM <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> wrote: > > jeffw [1] filed a deletion request for sway9 [2]: > > This packages is sway but with unspecified changes Yes, I should have documented this. This package includes patches to work around the lack of configuration options due to the stubbornness of upstream, and the lack of a desire to interact with them. Down the line I will consider preparing these for submission, but for now I prefer to keep them as is. > and doesn't seem to be useful to anyone except the uploader. > The guidelines for the AUR suggest a package should be useful > to multiple people. I'm not sure how this is the case. I have seen many "opinionated" PKGBUILDs on the AUR, and this isn't the first one I've submitted either. This package contains patches that could be useful to anyone. It would have been nice if you had actually tried to contact me to clear things up before submitting a deletion request. I'd be happy to correct the situation if something is wrong. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/jeffw/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/sway9/

5 years, 10 months

Re: [PRQ#39934] Deletion Request for rofi-dmenu

by Alex Palaistras

Hi, Though creating an entire package for a single symlink does seem rather wasteful, there is one difference to `opendoas-sudo` -- `rofi` will behave differently if `argv[0] == "dmenu"`; furthermore, the value of this package isn't the symlink itself, it's the fact that this `provides=("dmenu")`, and therefore will appease packages that depend on `dmenu` when `rofi` is installed (which would, also, potentially override any symlink the user has made in their `$HOME`). I don't see the point of deleting a package that has seen some use in the community, but perhaps there's a bigger picture that I don't really see here. Thanks, Alex On 26/01/2023 07:55, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > Erus_Iluvatar [1] filed a deletion request for rofi-dmenu [2]: > > Same reason as opendoas- > sudo[https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/aur- > requests(a)lists.archlinux.org/thread/7J2SRRVYQQGMKJCJCGGQVFWAX7XD3FBK/] > we don't need a whole package for a symlink. > > [1]https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Erus_Iluvatar/ > [2]https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/rofi-dmenu/

2 years, 10 months

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