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

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#6085] Deletion Request for firefox-extension-adblock-plus

by Rafael Soares

There are too many packages that are almost the same as the ones available in [Community] and won't be deleted (eg. syncthing-bin) 2016-08-05 9:58 GMT-04:00 <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org>: > Eschwartz [1] filed a deletion request for firefox-extension-adblock- > plus [2]: > > This package is identical to the community package ""firefox-adblock- > plus" except that it fixes the bug > https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/47395 > > The appropriate response is to vote for the bug and encourage it to be > fixed (or have the community package dropped to the AUR)... not submit > it to the AUR with a slightly-reworded name to *evade* the upload > restrictions for duplicate packages. > > ... > > Commit log excerpts :lol: > > d5e4cde rename to use in AUR > 9355071 Add description. This signed package, not the same as in > community. In community package is useless. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Eschwartz/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/firefox-extension-adblock-plus/ > -- Rafael Soares (95)99171-4857

9 years, 4 months

[PRQ#61102] Deletion Request for wiipy

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

NinjaCheetah [1] filed a deletion request for wiipy [2]: After hours of testing, I have to give in and acknowledge I'm way in over my head, and that this package is definitely what one would consider "irreparably broken". I really thought that things were working when they worked on the first 2 systems I tested, but then a third revealed the actual nightmare happening behind the scenes and that I guess I didn't know what I was doing. I've now spent several more hours attempting to change my PKGBUILD so that I don't have any of the issues I was having, but I don't think it's going to work out right now. Maybe in the future when I have a lot more experience with this kind of stuff I'll start fresh and get it working, but for now this is useful to nobody. I apologize for the inconvenience. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/NinjaCheetah/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/wiipy/

1 year, 5 months

Fwd: Re: [PRQ#49071] Deletion Request for jdk13-openjdk-bin

by Jochum Döring

-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [PRQ#49071] Deletion Request for jdk13-openjdk-bin Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2023 17:52:14 +0200 From: Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros(a)runbox.eu> To: Jochum Döring <jochum(a)home.nl>, aur-requests(a)lists.archlinux.org Hi, Thank you for your reply, and sorry that I didn't consider this. I will revoke my deletion request shortly. Cheers, Marcell (MarsSeed) On 16 October 2023 17:09:16 GMT+02:00, "Jochum Döring" <jochum(a)home.nl> wrote: >Have you looked into this? It's a dependency for a CNC software package. It won't work without this specific version. >The depending package is actively being worked on and has since migrated to jdk17, but building with jdk17 currently fails and succeeds with openjdk13. I'm working with the devs to find a solution. >So for now it is still required until the problem is resolved. > >On 16-10-23 14:39, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >> MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for jdk13-openjdk-bin [2]: >> >> Cleanup of deprecated JDK 13 short-term support packages. >> >> JDK 13 is EOL since March 2020; >> not even security patches get delivered after that date. >> >> Users should migrate to a newer JDK/JRE. >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/jdk13-openjdk-bin/ >

2 years, 1 month

Re: [PRQ#46894] Deletion Request for linux-libexplain-dev

by Marcell Meszaros

The foreign 'devel' DEB package is also very old, like its main binary application: it was released in 2014. And in Arch Linux, "devel" header files by default should be put inside the main library package, not in a separate one. (Except maybe in some special cases when an application has a huge number and/or large total size of 'devel' files, like in case of qtcreator + qtcreator-devel.) Here it is not like that at all. On 1 September 2023 07:58:35 GMT+02:00, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for linux-libexplain-dev [2]: > >This package violates AUR submission guidelines by using a binary >release of an open-source library without having a '-bin' suffixed >pkgname. > >It does not seem to be used by anyone apart from the submitter (0 >comments/votes). > >[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/linux-libexplain-dev/

2 years, 3 months

[PRQ#53797] Deletion Request for dfilemanager-git

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for dfilemanager-git [2]: Broken Qt5/KDE5 file manager. Discontinued (original: 2016 [a], revival fork: 2020-2021 [b]). The latter fails to build too (API mismatch with exiv2/libexiv2.so). Tried to fix, but there are too many remaining issues. Exiv2 can be patched out (disabled), but KDE5's solid5 cannot. (Tightly coupled in main app code, in spite of what the old README says). Also on KDE5, DFileManager has GUI problems, e.g.: - no proper scaling: main toolbar & location bar too small (even on FullHD/120%); - icons barely visible: white outlines on bright gray background. I don't think it's useful to keep as is. And KDE5 is EOL. (KDE6 ETA in 2 weeks.) Btw, KDE's Dolphin has a similar layout, but offers way more features and customizability. [a]: https://sourceforge.net/p/dfilemanager/code/ci/master/log [b]: https://github.com/probonopd/dfilemanager/commits/master [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/dfilemanager-git/

1 year, 10 months

Re: [PRQ#57934] Deletion Request for any-dl

by Oliver Bandel

Quoting Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros(a)runbox.eu> (snt: 2024-03-23 07:23 +0100 CET) (rcv: 2024-03-23 07:23 +0100 CET): > On 17 March 2024 13:22:23 GMT+01:00, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > >MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for any-dl [2]: > > > >ocamlnet is not compatible with ocaml5, so this package in turn is not > >compatible with current Arch Linux. > > > >[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > >[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/any-dl/ > > > The last package change is ill-conceived. The build stays broken. > > A package cannot depend on both 'ocaml' (v5) and 'ocaml4', as they conflict with each other. Still not useful to keep this dead build. This package has problems because of ocamlnet not being available for ocaml5. I asked the author of ocamlnet, if it was planned to update it for OCaml5. The answer was yes. So far there is no time plan for that, but next week I may habe more information.

1 year, 8 months

[PRQ#49031] Deletion Request for android-sdk-dummy

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for android-sdk-dummy [2]: Dummy packages are not useful to provide to a package manager, and they are not allowed on AUR. Having a dummy package installed defeats the purpose of using a package manager. If a package requires another package, there's a good reason for it, and both should be installed in the system for them to work. No one forces anyone to install Android IDE's and Android SDK's / platform tools they use for development into the system. They can live happily inside the user's home folder as well. In that case, the user is not using pacman to manage those installations. If an AUR package requires Android SDK platform tools, both should be managed by the package manager. Developers have to ensure that they have sufficient storage space on their system for their particular developer activity, but disk space is not that expensive nowadays. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/android-sdk-dummy/

2 years, 2 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#3072] Deletion Request for gnome-shell-extension-searchbookmarks

by kaptoxic

On 04/19/2015 02:58 AM, Doug Newgard wrote: > On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 06:45:02 +0000 (UTC) > notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > >> kaptoxic [1] filed a deletion request for >> gnome-shell-extension-searchbookmarks [2]: >> >> This package is not needed since there is >> gnome-shell-extension-searchbookmarks-git. >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/kaptoxic/ >> [2] >> https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/gnome-shell-extension-searchbookmarks/ > This makes no sense. One tracks releases, the other tracks git master. Two > different things. The -git package is really, really old, too. I see, but the extension is out of date, there is no point in tracking releases (similar to the situation with other gnome extensions). Since *-git package tracks master, it cannot possibly be older than "release" package, it is only that the old version is hardcoded in PKGBUILD. (Note that I flagged the package just because it does not work for the current version of gnome). Once the code starts working for newest gnome releases, *-git package will be fine again.

10 years, 8 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#16875] Deletion Request for gtk3-classic

by Jonathon Fernyhough

On 03/12/2019 18:26, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > rober_k [1] filed a deletion request for gtk3-classic [2]: > > this is an identical package as gtk3-mushrooms . > It pulls from the same repo, only is newer. > Proper way would be to mark gtk3-mushrooms out-of-date, not just > upload a different package with same content ;) > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/rober_k/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/gtk3-classic/ > It's not a simply a more up-to-date package. The source repo is the same but gtk3-classic is essentially a forked gtk3-mushrooms which adds experimental/developmental (?) aspects to the PKGBUILD which the original does not (e.g. use of meson and quilt, see e.g. [1]). Also, technically the gtk3-mushrooms package is not out-of-date as the upstream is still at 3.24.11. If all of this is potentially too confusing let me update the PKGBUILD to use a different source rather than having the package deleted. J [1] https://github.com/krumelmonster/gtk3-mushrooms/pull/26

6 years

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#2371] Deletion Request for geopy

by Jonathan Yantis

aur-requests: I would like to remove my deletion request if possible.Thanks! Richard: If you want I can orphan these two packages: python-geopy python2-geopy And you can make those your own and merge geopy into python2-geopy. The reason I suggest this is a bit confusing when it comes to exactly what the package is (ie: your geopy is actually geopy for python2 so then we would end up with two package: python-geopy (python 3) geopy (python 2) vs python-geopy (python 3) python2-geopy (python 2) Just let me know and I will orphan them and you can make them your own and do what you think is best. Best regards, Jonathan On Fri Feb 13 2015 at 10:22:15 PM Richard <richard(a)nerux.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I updated geopy. > If you want remove your request. > > Best regards, > > Le 2015-02-13 22:43, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org a écrit : > > jyantis [1] filed a deletion request for geopy [2]: > > > > This package hasn't been updated in several years. > > These packages now replace it: > > python-geopy > > python2-geopy > > > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/jyantis/ > > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/geopy/ >

10 years, 10 months

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