[aur-general] List of comminity64 failures?
belanger at ASTRO.UMontreal.CA
Mon Mar 17 20:55:12 EDT 2008
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Eric Belanger wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
>> Allan McRae wrote:
>>> Is there a list of packages that can not be put in community64 due to
>>> build failures/binary package etc? I had a look through the wiki and
>>> found http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_ToDoS which has no
>>> community info. Looking at the pkg diff page
>>> (http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html) there are ~60 packages
>>> in i686 community but not in x86_64 community. There is only 1 in x86_64
>>> but not in i686 which is not a lib32 package. I'm going to spend some
>>> time shortening this list but I'm sure some of these are legitimately only
>>> As an aside, something is wrong with the matching in the pkg_diff page.
>>> Some packages appear twice in the list, once with a missing i686 version
>>> and once with a missing x86_64 version. I think this is when the is a
>>> major version difference between the platforms. e.g. gambas2 & yaz.
>> Replying to my own post... I found this:
>> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community64_Status. It was old and
>> unused so I have changed it to have the current package differences there.
>> Can people add reasons for these packages not be in x86_64 (if there is
>> one). It will save me from having to look at every package individually.
> I'm aware of several (if not most) of these build issues. I'll add to the
> list tonight. You might want to wait for my input before going through each
> individual packages.
I added what I knew.
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the aur-general